Obergefell v. Hodges

Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U.S. 644 (2015), is the Supreme Court decision issued on June 26, 2015, that in a 5–4 ruling held state bans on same-sex marriage and state refusals to recognize marriages lawfully performed elsewhere unconstitutional under the Fourteenth Amendment.

Justice Anthony Kennedy delivered the opinion of the Court, joined by Justices Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan. Citing Griswold v. Connecticut, the Court concluded that the right to marry is a fundamental liberty protected by the Due Process Clause and that denying same-sex couples access to marriage also violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution. As the Supreme Court has found in cases such as Loving v. Virginia, Zablocki v. Redhail and Turner v. Safley, the extension includes a fundamental right to marry. Justice Kennedy explained that marriage is central to individual autonomy, embodies a unique two-person union, protects children and families, and remains a keystone of social order. On these grounds, the Court held that same-sex couples are entitled to marry “on the same terms and conditions as opposite-sex couples” and that states must recognize such marriages performed in other jurisdictions. The ruling not only gave same-sex couples the right to marry nationwide but also extended related marital benefits, including adoption rights, access to health care, inheritance, taxation, spousal benefits under Social Security, and recognition as next of kin for medical decisions. The decision reshaped family law, property, insurance, and business regulation across the United States.

The road to Obergefell was shaped by decades of litigation and legislation. In Baker v. Nelson (1972), the Supreme Court dismissed a same-sex marriage appeal “for want of a substantial federal question,” discouraging federal review for decades. States then enacted statutory and constitutional bans, beginning with Maryland in 1973. By the late 1980s, municipalities and the District of Columbia had introduced domestic partnership laws, and in 1993 the Hawaii Supreme Court in Baehr v. Lewin signaled that bans could be unconstitutional under state law. Congress responded with the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) in 1996, limiting federal recognition of marriage to opposite-sex couples. Progress resumed when Vermont adopted civil unions in 2000, and in Goodridge v. Department of Public Health (2003) the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court held that same-sex couples had a right to marry. In United States v. Windsor (2013), the Supreme Court invalidated Section 3 of DOMA, requiring federal recognition of same-sex marriages valid under state law, but left Section 2 intact. By 2015, thirty-six states and the District of Columbia permitted same-sex marriage, and public opinion had shifted to majority support. Pew Research Center polling in 2001 showed a majority of Americans opposed same-sex marriage, but by 2015 a majority supported it.

Obergefell consolidated six federal cases from Michigan, Ohio, Kentucky, and Tennessee: DeBoer v. Snyder (2014), Obergefell v. Wymyslo (2013), Henry v. Himes (2014), Bourke v. Beshear (2014), Love v. Beshear (2014), and Tanco v. Haslam (2014). The cases all involved couples who sought to marry, to have their marriages recognized, or to secure related parental rights. District courts sided with the couples, but the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit reversed in DeBoer v. Snyder (2014), relying on Baker v. Nelson, holding that states could retain traditional definitions of marriage. The Supreme Court granted review, heard arguments in April 2015, and issued its decision two months later. 

The Court directed briefing on whether the Fourteenth Amendment requires states to license marriages between same-sex couples and whether it requires states to recognize such marriages when performed elsewhere. Oral arguments were heard on April 28, 2015, with Mary Bonauto, Douglas Hallward-Driemeier, and U.S. Solicitor General Donald Verrilli arguing for the petitioners, and John Bursch of Michigan and Joseph Whalen of Tennessee representing the states. A record 148 amicus briefs were submitted.

The dissents objected both to the reasoning and the method of decision. Chief Justice Roberts, joined by Justices Scalia and Thomas, argued that the Constitution does not redefine marriage and warned of conflicts with religious liberty. Justice Scalia, joined by Thomas, criticized the ruling as undemocratic. Justice Thomas, joined by Scalia, rejected substantive due process and claimed liberty under the Constitution protects only freedom from physical restraint. Citing Washington v. Glucksberg, Justice Alito, joined by Justices Scalia and Thomas, contended that same-sex marriage was not “deeply rooted” in American history and cautioned against judicial overreach.

The decision legalized same-sex marriage nationwide and required states to extend all marital benefits equally. Some resistance followed, but in Pavan v. Smith (2017) the Court reaffirmed that Obergefell requires equal treatment in areas such as birth certificates. Obergefell stands as a landmark in constitutional law, transforming family law and civil rights in the United States.

[Last reviewed in September of 2025 by the Wex Definitions Team] 

Wex