Overturning
marriage equality is now a present threat.
Many of the issues both POC and LGBTQI+
Americans confronted in Trump’s first term -
health care, unemployment, housing,
immigration, voting rights, among others -
front and center, again, and on the chopping
block. And the fear is palpable. “I think it’s
going to go away. I don’t know what’s going to
happen to those already married, but there are
a lot of benefits,” Pat, of West Palm Beach,
Florida, told me. “What would that be? A
forced divorce?”
Put
a ring on it
With this threat
looming large, many LGBTQ+ couples are dashing
to the altar. The thought of many more former
Kentucky county clerks like Kim Davis becomes
a nightmare. Davis is infamously known for
refusing to issue marriage licenses to
same-sex couples in 2015, and this August, she
formally petitioned the Supreme Court to
overturn “Obergefell v. Hodges.”
“I
told a nephew who’s gay, young, 22, to get
married last year because we don’t know,”
Pat said. Former Secretary of State Hillary
Clinton echoed the same sentiment. On the
“Raging Moderates” podcast in August,
Clinton strongly advised couples to get
married before SCOTUS overturns it. “Anybody
in a committed relationship out there, in
the LGBTQ community, you ought to consider
getting married,” she said, “because I don’t
think they’ll undo existing marriages, but I
fear they will undo the national right.”
Clarence
Thomas’s goal
In a Trumped-up
Supreme Court, SCOTUS has been his enabler.
Justice Clarence Thomas faulted the Supreme
Court for refusing to block marriage equality
in Alabama twice - in 2015 and in 2022.
Targeting marriage equality has been his goal
since its passage.
Shortly after the
SCOTUS overturned “Roe v. Wade” in the “Dobbs
v Jackson Women’s Health Organization” case in
2022, Clarence Thomas seized the moment to
insert his opinion stating, “[W]e have a duty
to ‘correct the error’ established in those
precedents.” Clarence further stated that the
landmark decision “should reconsider” its past
rulings codifying the rights to contraception,
same-gender intimacy, and marriage equality.
Surely, he jests, I thought, because of
Thomas’s interracial marriage, which marriage
equality is built upon. Moreover, the slippery
slope is one he, too, could confront, once
SCOTUS eliminates federal protection for
loving whom you choose. The irony here is that
many of the civil rights gains that ascended
Thomas to the highest court in the land, he
now wants to dismantle.
Last year, the
country celebrated 9 years since the
“Obergefell v. Hodges” decision, allowing us
LGBTQ+ Americans the fundamental right to
marry nationwide. However, while Justices
Thomas and Alito dissented in Obergefell in
2015, the broad public support that both
parties once embraced has now waned among
Republicans.
According to the
Gallup Poll, in 2025, support for marriage
equality among Democrats rose to 88%.
Republicans’ support, which peaked at 55% in
2021 and 2022, has dropped to 41%, the lowest
point since 2016, following the Obergefell
decision. With Republicans dominating all
branches of government, there is concern
whether Biden’s “Respect for Marriage Act”,
signed into law in 2022, would be upheld,
instead of marriage equality being thrown to
the states. Four out of ten judges Trump chose
during his first term are unabashedly
anti-LGBT+. He appointed over 54 conservative
judges, and they will remain on the bench long
after he’s gone. LGBTQ+ Americans, in Red
States especially, have concerns.
Benefits
up in the air
There are 1,138
federal benefits and hundreds of
state-specific benefits that heterosexual
couples take for granted. Denying these
benefits will cause financial instability and
immense stress. “Being a widow, all the
federal benefits have benefited me,” Pat
stated. “I’m on spousal Social Security and
not paying taxes on our joint money, is that
going to go away?”
Jim Obergefell, not
an activist of any sort, never expected to be
a cause célèbre. But when he sued his home
state of Ohio for refusing to recognize him as
the widower of his deceased spouse, the
lawsuit made its way to the highest court. Jim
Obergefell, then 48, the lead plaintiff in the
four marriage equality cases collectively
known as “Obergefell v. Hodge,” is now hanging
in the balance once again.
With
victory comes backlash
Ratifying marriage
equality was the right thing to do and should
not be repealed. Obergefell’s victory expanded
the nation’s understanding of marriage as a
fundamental right awarded to all people.
However, if Roe v. Wade can be overturned
after fifty years, so too can marriage
equality, highlighting that no one’s rights
can be taken for granted.
Sherry, a married
lesbian retired professor of nursing stated,
“I’m aware now that what we take as a right is
always conditional.”
Sadly, that’s true.
To the present day, I have wedded over 250
LGBTQ+ couples since 2004, when it was
legalized in Massachusetts. Each one was an
honor to officiate. When interviewed for
Massachusetts’ 20th anniversary of marriage
equality, a reporter asked to see my photos; I
have hundreds of them. I had to sort them into
three piles: deceased, divorced, and still
together. However, I never imagined the day
would come when I would have to stop.
