The Supreme Court on Monday declined an opportunity to overturn its landmark precedent recognizing a constitutional right to same-sex marriage, tossing aside an appeal that had roiled LGBTQ advocates who feared the conservative court might be ready to revisit the decade-old decision.

The court did not explain its reasoning to deny the appeal, which had received outsized attention – in part because the court’s 6-3 conservative majority three years ago overturned Roe v. Wade and the constitutional right to abortion that 1973 decision established. Since then, fears about Obergefell being the precedent to fall have grown.

Midterms. They saw what happened recently with the GOP loses and said nah. They are not stupid. They will get their chance next time.

  • Lurker123 [he/him]@hexbear.netEnglish
    1·
    28 days ago

    Depends on the case before the Court. The Court has the power to invalidate any law passed by Congress on the grounds that such law is unconstitutional. So one could imagine a ruling which rules both that the respect for marriage act is unconstitutional (first amendment or no congress authority due to not covered by commerce clause) and that Obergefell was wrongly decided (general overrule of SDP)