{"id":2404053,"date":"2025-02-19T07:49:01","date_gmt":"2025-02-19T12:49:01","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/scotus-needs-to-reevaluate-problem-it-created-in-obergefell\/"},"modified":"2025-02-19T07:51:32","modified_gmt":"2025-02-19T12:51:32","slug":"scotus-needs-to-reevaluate-problem-it-created-in-obergefell","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/scotus-needs-to-reevaluate-problem-it-created-in-obergefell\/","title":{"rendered":"SCOTUS Needs To Reevaluate Problem It Created In Obergefell"},"content":{"rendered":"<aside class=\"mashsb-container mashsb-main mashsb-stretched\"><div class=\"mashsb-box\"><div class=\"mashsb-count mash-medium\" style=\"&quot;\"><div class=\"counts mashsbcount\">18<\/div><span class=\"mashsb-sharetext\">SHARES<\/span><\/div><div class=\"mashsb-buttons\"><a class=\"mashicon-facebook mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/sharer.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservativenewsdaily.net%2Fbreaking-news%2Fscotus-needs-to-reevaluate-problem-it-created-in-obergefell%2F\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Facebook<\/span><\/a><a class=\"mashicon-twitter mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/intent\/tweet?text=&amp;url=https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/?p=2404053&amp;via=ConservNewsDly\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Twitter<\/span><\/a><a class=\"mashicon-subscribe mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"#\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Subscribe<\/span><\/a><div class=\"onoffswitch2 mash-medium mashsb-noshadow\" style=\"display:none\"><\/div><\/div>\n            <\/div>\n                <div style=\"clear:both\"><\/div><\/aside>\n            <!-- Share buttons by mashshare.net - Version: 4.0.47--><p>In late January, the Idaho House \u2064of Representatives passed a \u2064memorandum urging the U.S. Supreme Court to reverse its 2015 decision on same-sex marriage, known as *Obergefell\u200b v.Hodges*, which recognized marriage \u2064as a union between one man and\u200c one woman. The memo, which passed in the House with a\u200d vote of 46 to 24, will \u200bmove to the Idaho Senate for consideration. If \u200bapproved, it\u200d could prompt the Supreme Court to revisit the ruling that \u2063has been\u200c controversially \u200ddeemed as \u2064an\u200b &#8220;illegitimate overreach&#8221; in redefining marriage against conventional understanding and \u200dIdaho&#8217;s state constitution.<\/p>\n<p>The memorandum highlights concerns raised by Justices clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, who previously argued that *Obergefell* shoudl be overturned due\u200c to\u2063 its\u200b lack of constitutional basis and its negative implications for\u200d religious liberty.Although the\u2062 argument may seem outdated in \u2064a modern context, it intersects\u2064 with ongoing debates over gender and sexuality, drawing\u200b parallels between the recognition of\u200b same-sex marriage and the rise of\u200c transgender ideology.<\/p>\n<p>The <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/new-robocop-television-series-reportedly-in-the-works-at-troubling-studio\/\" title=\"New &#039;Robocop&#039; Television Series Reportedly in the Works at Troubling Studio\">author\u200d expresses skepticism<\/a> about the\u2064 permanence\u2063 of sexual orientation claims,suggesting that sexual attraction \u2063is more fluid than ofen believed. \u200bThere is\u200b also a \u200ccall\u2062 for a rational \u2063legal framework that accommodates both same-sex relationships and the views of those \u2063who oppose them for \u2064moral reasons.<\/p>\n<p>As \u2063for the future of *Obergefell*, though some believe \u200bthe current Supreme Court could be open to reconsidering it, no serious\u200d legal challenges are \u200cactively \u2062progressing. Thus, for now, the landmark ruling remains in effect \u2064as the law of\u200c the land.  <\/p>\n<p class=\"readmore\">\n    <button onclick=\"showReadMore()\" id=\"readmorebtn\">Read more&#8230;<\/button>\n<\/p>\n<hr id=\"line\">\n<span id=\"more\"><\/p>\n<div>\n<p>In late January, the Idaho House of Representatives passed a memorandum calling on the U.S. Supreme Court to &ldquo;reverse&rdquo; its 2015 gay marriage decision, <em>Obergefell v. Hodges<\/em>, &ldquo;and restore the natural definition of marriage, a union of one man and one woman.&rdquo;&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>The <a href=\"https:\/\/legislature.idaho.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/sessioninfo\/2025\/legislation\/HJM001.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">memo<\/a> passed <a href=\"https:\/\/idahocapitalsun.com\/2025\/01\/27\/idaho-house-calls-on-u-s-supreme-court-to-reverse-same-sex-marriage-ruling\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">46 to 24<\/a> in the House and is heading to the Idaho Senate. If it passes the senate, it will be sent on to the Supreme Court as one more formal encouragement that it take up a case that might overturn <em>Obergefell<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p>The memo excoriates the &ldquo;illegitimate overreach&rdquo; in <em>Obergefell<\/em>, arguing that the decision redefined marriage in direct opposition to its natural, age-old definition, one also enshrined in Idaho&rsquo;s state constitution.<\/p>\n<p>The argument might seem 10 years late, but it comes at a time when &mdash; after the 2022 repeal of <em>Roe v. Wade<\/em> and the reinstallation of Trump &mdash; the Supreme Court might be receptive to such a call.<\/p>\n<p>Back in 2020, sitting justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito <a href=\"https:\/\/www.supremecourt.gov\/opinions\/20pdf\/19-926_5hdk.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">argued that the <em>Obergefell<\/em> decision<\/a> should be overturned &mdash; or at least fixed. The justices agreed that <em>Obergefell <\/em>had no basis at all in the 14<sup>th<\/sup> Amendment. The decision functions as law, overriding state and previous federal law to redefine the <em>essence <\/em>of marriage in a manner at odds with all major religions on earth. <em>Obergefell<\/em> rode rough-shod over these religions and dozens of state constitutions on the bases of a moral &mdash; not legal &mdash; opinion that the traditional definition of marriage espouses &ldquo;a bigoted worldview,&rdquo; at the dissenting opinion described it.<\/p>\n<p>&ldquo;The court has created a problem that only it can fix,&rdquo; the justices wrote. &ldquo;Until then, <em>Obergefell <\/em>will continue to have &ldquo;ruinous consequences for religious liberty.&rsquo;&rdquo;<\/p>\n<h2>Why Repeal <em>Obergefell?<\/em><\/h2>\n<p>In a nation where young women are celebrating because men who think they are women may be <a href=\"https:\/\/townhall.com\/tipsheet\/leahbarkoukis\/2025\/02\/07\/ncaa-no-men-in-womens-sports-n2651839\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">no longer allowed<\/a> to smash records in women&rsquo;s sports, arguing about the natural definition of marriage may seem passe.<\/p>\n<p>And maybe it is.<\/p>\n<p>But it&rsquo;s important to realize that because of how<em> Obergefell <\/em>was decided, the same-sex marriage issue is logically intertwined with the transgender craze of the last 10 years. <em>Obergefell<\/em> didn&rsquo;t just say, &ldquo;same-sex couples operate in ways pretty similar to <a href=\"https:\/\/amzn.to\/3YuVZYV\">infertile opposite-sex couples<\/a> from a legal perspective, so let&rsquo;s give marriage certificates to those who want them.&rdquo; <em>Obergefell <\/em>also argued that gays and lesbians are designed <em>by nature <\/em>only to marry one another.<\/p>\n<p>Marriage has been thought of as a permanent sexually sealed union between a man and woman from time immemorial, but for gays and lesbians, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.justice.gov\/sites\/default\/files\/crt\/legacy\/2015\/06\/26\/obergefellhodgesopinion.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\"><em>Obergefell<\/em> declared<\/a>, &ldquo;their immutable nature dictates that same-sex marriage is their only real path to this profound commitment.&rdquo;<\/p>\n<p>In other words, <em>Obergefell<\/em> doesn&rsquo;t argue that the legal definition of marriage should be adjusted for practical reasons. The court, instead, rejected the idea that men and women are naturally meant for one another, sexually speaking. <em>Obergefell <\/em>declares that <em>as a dictate of nature <\/em>some physically normal people&rsquo;s sexual biology is &ldquo;meant&rdquo; to be used with a member of the same sex.<\/p>\n<p>The court decided that some physically normal men and women are directed by their &ldquo;immutable nature&rdquo; to &ldquo;only&rdquo; marry members of their own sex. This rather dubious assumption became the entire basis for their claim that marriage must be redefined as a 14<sup>th<\/sup> Amendment right.<\/p>\n<h2>Transgenderism<\/h2>\n<p>But how did this relate to the trans phenomenon? The trans argument &mdash; which became popular immediately after <em>Obergefell <\/em>&mdash; declared that some people actually <em>are <\/em>the sexual opposite of their completely obvious physical biology. <em>Obergefell <\/em>declared the opposite of the obvious design-based <em>function <\/em>of male-female sexuality: a man can be sexually &ldquo;meant for&rdquo; a man. A woman can be sexually &ldquo;meant for&rdquo; a woman. The trans argument took a further step by denying not just apparent design, but actual, physical reality: a man can literally <em>be<\/em> a woman.<\/p>\n<p>The logic in <em>Obergefell <\/em>is less socially problematic than transgenderism. We do not always have to use our bodies exactly according to their apparent design function. But <em>Obergefell <\/em>positively claims that some physically normal people are <em>designed by nature <\/em>to have sex with their own sex. There is the same disregard for physical reality as we find in the claim that a person can actually <em>be by nature <\/em>a member of the opposite sex.<\/p>\n<h2>A Reality Check<\/h2>\n<p>There are only two sexes &mdash; male and female &mdash; and these two sexes are equipped with complementary halves of the human sexual system. That is a matter of immutable nature. Those who identify as &ldquo;gay&rdquo; or &ldquo;lesbian,&rdquo; as well as those who simply enjoy a little &ldquo;gay&rdquo; sex on the side, have the same immutable nature as everyone else.<\/p>\n<p>As for people&rsquo;s sexual attractions and desires, they are &mdash; like all attractions and desires &mdash; not really &ldquo;immutable&rdquo; or <a href=\"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/newshour\/science\/there-is-no-gay-gene-there-is-no-straight-gene-sexuality-is-just-complex-study-confirms\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">biologically inborn<\/a>. As I have <a href=\"https:\/\/thefederalist.com\/2018\/04\/05\/probably-think-sex-attraction-fixed-researchers-dont\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">argued at length<\/a> before, people&rsquo;s non-heterosexual sexual preferences are usually quite fluid over the course of five or ten years, particularly before people make choices in life and settle down.<\/p>\n<p>This doesn&rsquo;t mean that there should be no laws in America accommodating those who commit to a gay lifestyle. But it does mean that <em>Obergefell <\/em>ought to be scrapped and replaced with something rational &mdash; something that respects those who wish to be in committed same-sex relationships as well as those who for religious or moral reasons would not choose to do the same.<\/p>\n<h2>Will SCOTUS Reconsider <em>Obergefell<\/em> in 2025?<\/h2>\n<p>Statements like <a href=\"https:\/\/legislature.idaho.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/sessioninfo\/2025\/legislation\/HJM001.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Idaho&rsquo;s<\/a> are only toothless petitions &mdash; what&rsquo;s needed is lawsuits and robust debate.<\/p>\n<p><em>Obergefell <\/em>could be overturned by the same five justices who overturned <em>Roe v. Wade. <\/em>The likelihood of this was enough to cause Democrats to push through <a href=\"https:\/\/reason.com\/2022\/12\/13\/biden-signs-respect-for-marriage-act-into-law\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">a repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act<\/a> in 2022. Two years later, in the November 2024 election, three left-leaning states took the trouble to <a href=\"https:\/\/people.com\/same-sex-marriage-ballot-measures-california-colorado-hawaii-8741494\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">alter their constitutions<\/a> by ballot for the same reason &mdash; because they knew <em>Obergefell <\/em>might go the way of <em>Roe v Wade<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p>Nevertheless, to date, it is not clear if <em>Obergefell<\/em> will face serious reexamination. The only current case that seeks to challenge <em>Obergefell<\/em> stems from the <a href=\"https:\/\/kentuckylantern.com\/2025\/01\/30\/kim-davis-lawyer-eager-for-next-step-as-he-argues-same-sex-marriage-case-before-appeals-panel\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">protracted legal wranglings<\/a> surrounding Kim Davis&rsquo; case <a href=\"https:\/\/thefederalist.com\/2015\/09\/09\/what-both-sides-get-right-and-wrong-about-kim-davis\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">from 2015<\/a>. The matter is in the Sixth Circuit, but it&rsquo;s not likely to be heard by SCOTUS &mdash; the court, including Thomas and Alito, <a href=\"https:\/\/thehill.com\/regulation\/court-battles\/519636-supreme-court-rejects-bid-by-ex-kentucky-clerk-who-defied-gay\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">decided against<\/a> reviewing her case back in 2020.<\/p>\n<p>And so, for now &mdash; logic or no logic &mdash; <em>Obergefell <\/em>remains the law of the land.<\/p>\n<hr>\n<p>      Jeremiah Keenan is a <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/joe-biden-faces-backlash-over-pro-abortion-pick-for-hhs-secy\/\" title=\"Joe Biden faces backlash over pro-abortion pick for HHS Secy\">pro-life activist<\/a> and freelance writer. He recently graduated from the University of Pennsylvania, where he argued with leftists and wrote for The Daily Pennsylvanian. He also earned a bachelors in mathematics and assisted the sociology department researching religious opinion trends on eugenics, race, birth control, and homosexuality.  Jeremiah grew up in China and lives, at the moment, in Ohio.<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<p><\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>In late January, Idaho&#8217;s House urged the Supreme Court to reverse Obergefell v. Hodges and restore traditional marriage<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3687,"featured_media":2404054,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_mo_disable_npp":"","fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/thefederalist.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/Ober-e1739481904723.jpg","fifu_image_alt":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[36218,33240,27702,6994,32275],"class_list":["post-2404053","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","tag-legal-analysis","tag-lgbtq-rights","tag-obergefell","tag-scotus","tag-supreme-court"],"fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/thefederalist.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/Ober-e1739481904723.jpg","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2404053","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3687"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2404053"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2404053\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2404057,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2404053\/revisions\/2404057"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/2404054"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2404053"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2404053"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2404053"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}