{"title":"Is Full Marriage Equality for Same-Sex Couples Next? The Immediate and Future Impact of the Supreme Court's Decision in United States v. Windsor","authors":"C. Archibald","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2312079","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"As people across the political spectrum sat on the edge of their seats last summer, the Supreme Court waited until the last possible moment to issue its two same-sex marriage decisions. One, decided on a technicality, did nothing to answer the question of whether same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry. The other, United States v. Windsor, was a landmark decision, as it struck down Section 3 of the Federal Defense of Marriage Act and found that same-sex couples validly married under state law must have their marriages recognized under federal law. However, the Windsor opinion limits its holding to “those in lawful marriages,” and so has no immediate effect on the laws of the more than 30 states where same-sex marriage is still prohibited. This article will analyze the Windsor opinion and show how it makes it more likely that courts in the future will find that state same-sex marriage prohibitions are unconstitutional.","PeriodicalId":83444,"journal":{"name":"Valparaiso University law review. Valparaiso University. School of Law","volume":"13 1","pages":"695-713"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-10-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Valparaiso University law review. Valparaiso University. School of Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2312079","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
As people across the political spectrum sat on the edge of their seats last summer, the Supreme Court waited until the last possible moment to issue its two same-sex marriage decisions. One, decided on a technicality, did nothing to answer the question of whether same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry. The other, United States v. Windsor, was a landmark decision, as it struck down Section 3 of the Federal Defense of Marriage Act and found that same-sex couples validly married under state law must have their marriages recognized under federal law. However, the Windsor opinion limits its holding to “those in lawful marriages,” and so has no immediate effect on the laws of the more than 30 states where same-sex marriage is still prohibited. This article will analyze the Windsor opinion and show how it makes it more likely that courts in the future will find that state same-sex marriage prohibitions are unconstitutional.
去年夏天,当各个政治派别的人都坐在座位的边缘时,最高法院一直等到最后一刻才发布两项同性婚姻裁决。其中一个是技术性的,没有回答同性伴侣是否有宪法规定的结婚权利。另一起是美国诉温莎案(United States v. Windsor),这是一个具有里程碑意义的判决,因为它推翻了《联邦婚姻保护法》(Federal Defense of Marriage Act)第3条,认定根据州法律合法结婚的同性伴侣的婚姻必须得到联邦法律的承认。然而,温莎的意见将其裁决限制在“合法婚姻的人”,因此对30多个仍然禁止同性婚姻的州的法律没有直接影响。本文将分析温莎的意见,并说明它如何使法院在未来更有可能发现州同性婚姻禁令违宪。