Today’s Staff Editorial
We’re in the midst of what’s perhaps the most monumental issue of this Supreme Court — and it’s by far the sexiest.
In case you haven’t yet caught on from the influx of tweets, Facebook reposts of the red Human Rights Campaign equal sign and news articles, the Supreme Court is discussing same-sex marriage. It’s a potentially historic time, one when the justices may vote in favor of equal rights.
Or not.
Two cases are up for debate. The first, which was presented yesterday, is Hollingsworth v. Perry. It involves California’s Proposition 8, which voters passed in 2008 to define marriage as between only a man and a woman and to overturn a state Supreme Court decision earlier that year that approved same-sex marriage. Then, this morning, the Supreme Court will hear a presentation on United States v. Windsor, which battles the definition of marriage in the federal Defense of Marriage Act. The current definition, which calls for the union of a man and woman, denies same-sex couples more than 1,000 federal benefits that come with marriage, according to Slate.
The Supreme Court is in the powerful position of unilaterally deciding how to handle these cases. And advocates from both ends of the political spectrum on same-sex marriage seem to be acknowledging this — everyone is waiting with bated breath to see what the outcome will be.
The decision from the first day’s discussion has the potential to monumentally change the way our government rules on same-sex marriage if the justices choose to rule broadly and overturn every state constitutional provision and law banning the unions. However, they could also set back the same-sex marriage movement by upholding California’s ban and continuing to leave it up to the states.
Both days have been centered around whether there is a constitutional right to same-sex marriage that states may not deny. And both cases being considered are really about the word “marriage,” an institution certain conservative politicians seem to have a hard time sharing with same-sex couples.
Today, the court is set to devote nearly two hours to the second case involving the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act, which denies federal recognition of same-sex marriage. Lower courts have found the law unconstitutional, concluding that withholding federal benefits such as preferential tax breaks, Social Security survivor benefits and medical leave is discriminatory when both heterosexual and homosexual couples are legally married.
Every member of this editorial board agrees that same-sex couples should have the same rights as heterosexual couples. We were proud on Election Day when our state’s voters were the first to legalize same-sex marriage. We believe the Supreme Court should recognize the changing times and vote in favor of acknowledging same-sex marriage as a constitutional right.
We realize these cases have put the court in the spotlight amid fervent, emotional debates with moral, religious and social implications. Most states ban same-sex marriage, but we are part of a generation in which a growing number of Americans believe being gay is not a choice. We are aware this may be too progressive for the elderly members of the Supreme Court. But we remain vigilantly hopeful.
At this point, it simply seems to be a waiting game. A majority of Americans support same-sex marriage, and a growing number are coming around to the idea. This editorial board believes it will just be a matter of when, rather than if, these changes happen. The current Supreme Court justices could decide they want to be part of history by making the decision in favor of same-sex marriage.
And if they don’t, it’s not a time for despair. There is ample opportunity in the future for change to happen. Yes, we obviously want it now — the fight for equality has been extensive, and the benefits are long overdue. But it’s important not to give up, because change is coming. We just need all the pieces to come together.
