Here's why advocates doubt the Supreme Court will revisit marriage equality

Axios

a day ago

The first challenge to same-sex marriage since the Supreme Court enshrined the right a decade ago comes before a very different mix of justices, LGBTQ+ advocates said.
The big picture: Legal experts believe the court is highly unlikely to hear the case because unwinding protections for same-sex marriage after so many years would be incredibly complicated.
The request challenges the landmark decision in Obergefell v Hodges, which established that marriage equality is constitutionally protected under the 14th Amendment's due process clause and the Equal Protection Clause.
Catch up quick: Kim Davis, a former Kentucky county clerk, is asking the Supreme Court to appeal an order that requires her to pay $360,000 to a gay couple in damages and fees for refusing to issue them a marriage license in 2015.
Davis has been unsuccessfully appealing the order for years, and lower courts have repeatedly rejected her arguments.
In a news release announcing the petition, an attorney representing Davis called Obergefell an "egregious opinion" that violated his clients "religious liberty."
What they're saying: Mary Bonauto, one of the attorneys who represented lead plaintiff Jim Obergefell, told Axios that Davis' case is "extremely narrow" and that she's "attempting to shoehorn an opportunity to relitigate" the landmark case.
"There's good reason for the Supreme Court to deny review in this case rather than unsettle something so positive for couples, children, families and the larger society as marriage equality," she said.
The intrigue: Shannon Minter, a spokesperson for the National Center for LGBTQ Rights told Axios that the Supreme Court "has shown an alarming willingness" to "reverse long-standing precedent" in recent years.
He named the court's decision to reverse the right to abortion access enshrined in Roe v. Wade through the Dobbs decision, and gutting legislation that sought to equalize historic discrimination against people of color such as the Voting Rights Act and affirmative action policies.
He also mentioned the court imposing new restrictions on the power of lower courts to unilaterally freeze nationwide policies through "universal" injunctions in a case related to President Trump's efforts to end constitutionally-protected birthright citizenship.
Flashback: Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas said in 2022 that the high court should reconsider multiple previous opinions, including those that offer protections to same-sex relationships, marriage equality and access to contraceptives.
Despite the unpredictability of the Supreme Court, here's why LGBTQ+ advocates aren't worried about marriage equality being reversed:
What are the legal implications of trying to reverse marriage equality?
Overruling Obergefell could potentially make someone's marital status apply in one state but not in another.
Multiple experts said that would create a patchwork of problems for tax laws, insurance policies and legal custody over children.
Robbie Kaplan's successful arguments to the Supreme Court in 2013 laid down the foundation for Obergefell.
"It's hard to imagine a situation where the reliance interests are more consequential than in the case of nationwide marriage equality," Kaplan told Axios.
"It's not just a recipe for administrative chaos," Kaplan continued. "It also would result in an almost indescribable amount of (needless) suffering and heartache."
Do Americans support marriage equality?
Congress passed the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996, which federally defined marriage as a "legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife."
At the time, 68% of Americans said they did not support marriage equality, according to a poll Gallup conducted in 1996.
Stunning stat: Ten years after Obergefell, attitudes about marriage equality have flipped, as 68% of Americans now support it, according to Gallup's most recent numbers.
What other protections exist for same-sex marriages?
The Respect For Marriage Act passed by Congress in 2022, codifying the right to same-sex and interracial marriages is seen as a safety net for LGBTQ+ protections.
The legislation also repealed the Defense of Marriage Act.
Yes, but: The Respect For Marriage Act doesn't prohibit individual states from limiting or banning same-sex marriage if Obergefell were struck down.
What's next: SCOTUS will decide if it wants to take up the case this fall.
Approximately 7,000-8,000 petitions for a writ of certiorari are filed with the court each year, and the justices hear oral arguments in about 80 cases, according to the court's website.
The bottom line:"None of us can predict what the court will do," Suzanne Goldberg, Director of the Sexuality and Gender Law Clinic at Columbia Law told Axios.