document_title: Irish stepdance

question_text: why do irish dancers dance with their arms by their sides

text: Irish stepdance

text: History[edit]

text: Early history (prehistory–1927)[edit]

text: The dancing traditions of Ireland are likely to have grown in tandem with Irish traditional music. Its first roots may have been in Pre-Christian Ireland, but Irish dance was also partially influenced by dance forms on the Continent, especially the quadrille dances. Some of the earliest recorded references to Irish dance are to the Rinnce Fada or "long dance", towards the end of the 17th century, which was performed largely on social occasions.[1] The dancing traditions of Ireland are likely to have grown in tandem with Irish traditional music. Its first roots may have been in Pre-Christian Ireland, but Irish dance was also partially influenced by dance forms on the Continent, especially the quadrille dances. Traveling dancing masters taught all over Ireland beginning around the 1750s and continuing as late as the early 1900s.[2]

text: Although informal competitions were held between towns and students of different dance masters, the first organised feis was held in 1897 by the Gaelic League, an Irish nationalist body formed with the purpose of preserving traditional Irish language and culture.[3] The League codified and promoted the form of step dance which was practiced in southern areas.[2]

text: Codification and organisation (1927–1994)[edit]

text: In 1927, the Gaelic League set up An Coimisiún Le Rincí Gaelacha (CLRG), a separate body dedicated to the organisation and standardisation of Irish dance. CLRG created certifications for dance teachers and began to hold examinations for adjudicators of feisanna.

text: In the 19th century, the Irish diaspora had spread Irish dance all over the world, especially to North America and Australia. However, schools and feiseanna were not established until the early 1900s: in America these tended to be created within Irish-American urban communities, notably in Chicago. The first classes in stepdancing were held there by the Philadelphia-born John McNamara.[4]

text: According to the BBC's A Short History of Irish Dance, "The nature of the Irish dance tradition has changed and adapted over the centuries to accommodate and reflect changing populations and the fusion of new cultures. The history of Irish dancing is as a result a fascinating one. The popular Irish dance stage shows of the past ten years have reinvigorated this cultural art, and today Irish dancing is healthy, vibrant, and enjoyed by people across the globe."[5]

text: Sometime in that decade or the one following, a dance teacher had his students compete with arms held firmly down to their sides, hands in fists, to call more attention to the intricacy of the steps. The adjudicator approved by placing the students well. Other teachers and dancers quickly followed the new trend. Movement of the arms is sometimes incorporated into modern Irish stepdance, although this is generally seen as a hybrid and non-traditional addition and is only done in shows and performances, not competitions.

text: The first television broadcast of Irish stepdance, on CBS in 1945, contributed to the increased popularity of a stepdance style originating in Ulster. This style, which incorporated balletic movements and high elevation on the toes, gradually usurped the Munster style with fast, low footwork which had prevailed up to that point.[6]

text: Post-Riverdance era (1994–present)[edit]

text: The success of Riverdance and other dance shows in the late 20th century influenced the choreography and presentation of stepdance in both competitive and public performance environments. This included the use of simpler costumes and hairstyles for public performance in imitation of the Riverdance styles, and the development of new dance styles, such as hard shoe dances performed to music typically associated with soft shoes.[7] In competitive dance, movements from flamenco and figure skating began to be incorporated into traditional steps, although such developments were criticised by elements of the competitive dancing community.[8]

text: Dances[edit]

text: Technique[edit]

text: The techniques involved in Irish stepdance are essentially similar across each of the individual dance styles. The basic style of modern step dance used in competitive contexts evolved from the stylistic features of traditional step dance in Munster. This style is largely performed on the balls of the feet with toes pointed outwards.[9] Competitive dancers are judged on posture, timing, rhythm and execution, which in practice means a rigid torso, rapid and intricate footwork, and legs and feet crossed over each other, with knees close together.[10]

text: Irish stepdances can be placed into two categories. Solo stepdances, which are danced by a single dancer, and group stepdances, which are coordinated with 2 or more dancers.

text: Solo dance[edit]

text:
Reel, slip jig, hornpipe, and jig are all types of Irish stepdances and are also types of Irish traditional music. These fall into two broad categories based on the shoes worn: hard shoe and soft shoe dances. Reels, which are in 2
4 or 4
4 time, and slip jigs, which are in 9
8 time and considered to be the lightest and most graceful of the dances, are soft shoe dances.[11][12] Hornpipes, which can be in 2
4 or 4
4 time, are danced in hard shoes. Three jigs are danced in competition; the light jig, the single jig, which is also called the Hop jig, and the treble jig, which is also called double jig. Light and single jigs are in 6
8 time, and are soft shoes dances, while the treble jig is hard shoe, danced in a slow 6
8. The last type of jig is the slip jig, which is danced in 9
8 time. There are many dances, which steps vary between schools. The traditional set dances (danced in hardshoe) like St. Patrick's Day and the Blackbird, among others, are the only dances that all schools have the same steps.

text: The actual steps in Irish stepdance are usually unique to each school or dance teacher. Steps are developed by Irish dance teachers for students of their school. Each dance is built out of the same basic elements, or steps, but the dance itself is unique, and new dances are being choreographed continuously. For this reason, videotaping of competitions is forbidden under the rules of An Coimisiun.

text: Each step is a sequence of foot movements, leg movements and leaps, which lasts for 8 bars of music. It is traditional for each step to be performed first on the right foot and then on the left foot. This practice leads to a large proportion of dancers exhibiting a preference for their right leg over their left in dance movements.[13] Hard shoe dancing includes clicking (striking the heels of the shoes against each other), trebles (the toe of the shoe striking the floor), stamps (the entire foot striking the floor), and an increasing number of complicated combinations of taps from the toes and heels.

text: There are two types of hard shoe dance, the solo dances, which are the hornpipe and treble jig, and the traditional set dances, also called set dances, which are also solo dances, despite having the same name as the social dances. Traditional set dances use the same choreography regardless of the school whereas contemporary sets are choreographed by the teachers. The music and steps for each traditional set was set down by past dance masters and passed down under An Coimisiún auspices as part of the rich history of stepdancing, hence the "traditional."

text: There are about 30 traditional sets used in modern stepdance, but the traditional sets performed in most levels of competition are St. Patrick's Day, the Blackbird, Job of Journeywork, Garden of Daisies, King of the Fairies, and Jockey to the Fair. The remaining traditional set dances are primarily danced at championship levels. These tunes vary in tempo to allow for more difficult steps for higher level dancers. An unusual feature of the set dance tune is that many are "crooked", with some of the parts, or sections, of the tunes departing from the common 8 bar formula. The crooked tune may have a part consisting of 7½ bars, fourteen bars, etc. For example, the "St. Patrick's Day" traditional set music consists of an eight-bar "step," followed by a fourteen-bar "set."

text: Group dance[edit]

text: The group dances are called céilí dances or, in the less formal but common case, figure dances. Competitive céilís are more precise versions of the festive group dances traditionally experienced in social gatherings.

text: There is a list of 30 céilí dances that have been standardised and published in An Coimisiun's Ar Rince Ceili (which replaced Ár Rinncidhe Foirne in 2015)[14] as examples of traditional Irish folk dances. Standardized dances for 4, 6 or 8 dancers are also often found in competition. Most traditional céilí dances in competition are significantly shortened in the interests of time. Many stepdancers never learn the entire dance, as they will never dance the later parts of the dance in competition.

text: Other céilí dances are not standardised. In local competition, figure dances may consist of two or three dancers. These are not traditional book dances and are choreographed as a blend of both traditional céilí dancing and solo dancing. Standardized book dances for 16 dancers are also rarely offered. Figure Choreography competitions held at major oireachtasi (championships) involve more than 8 dancers and are a chance for dance schools to show off novel and intricate group choreography. An Coimisiún has also introduced a "dance drama" category, which combines physical theatre with Irish dance. A 200-word story is read and followed by a six-minute dance performance including costumes, mime and facial expression.[15]

text: Some dance schools recognised by An Coimisiún Le Rincí Gaelacha place as much emphasis on céilí dancing as on solo dancing, meticulously rehearsing the dances as written in the book and striving for perfect interpretation. In competition, figure dancers are expected to dance their routine in perfect unison, forming seamless yet intricate figures based on their positions relative to each other.

text: Costume[edit]

text: The development of Irish stepdance costumes occurred throughout the 20th century alongside the dance style itself. Costumes were thus heavily influenced by the rules and competitive structures put in place by An Coimisiún and other organisations. In more recent years, costumes changed dramatically and departed significantly from traditional designs.[16]

text: Competitive costumes[edit]

text: Judges at competitions critique the dancers primarily on their performance, but they also take into account presentation. In every level of competition the dancers must wear either hard shoes or soft shoes. Boys and girls wear very distinctive costumes. Girls must wear white poodle socks or black tights. Competition dresses have changed in many ways since Irish Dance first appeared. Several generations ago the appropriate dress was simply your "Sunday Best". In the 1980s ornately embroidered velvet became popular. Other materials include gaberdine and wool. Today many different fabrics are used, including lace, sequins, silk, embroidered organzas and more. Some dresses, mainly solo dresses, have flat backed crystals added for stage appeal. Swarovski is being used more frequently. Velvet is also becoming popular again, but in multiple colours with very different, modern embroidery. The commission dresses have stiff skirts which can be stiffened with Vilene and are intricately embroidered.

text: Costumes can be simple for the beginning female dancer; they often wear a simple dance skirt and plain blouse or their dancing school's costume. The certain colours and emblem that are used on the dresses represents the dance school to differentiate it from other dance schools. These are similar to a solo dress, but are simple with only a few colours, while are still more pounds, depending on the fabric, and may require some getting used to. School costumes are not decorated with crystals.

text: At advanced levels where dancers can qualify for Major competitions, solo costumes help each dancer show their sense of style, and enable them to stand out among a crowd. The dancers can have a new solo dress specially tailored for them with their choice of colours, fabrics, and designs. Popular designers include Gavin Doherty, Siopa Rince, and Elevations. Some dancers will even design the dress themselves. The dancer can also buy second hand from another dancer. Since the dresses are handmade with pricey materials, unique designs, and are measured to each dancer's body type, the dresses can cost between $600 and $4,000.

text: Along with having the handcrafted dresses, championship commission dancers have wigs and crowns or decorative headbands. In commission schools female dancers have the choice to wear either a wig or curl their hair, but usually in championship levels, girls choose to wear a wig, as wigs are more convenient and popular. Dancers get synthetic ringlet wigs that match their hair color or go with an extremely different shade (a blonde dancer wearing a black wig or vice versa). The wigs can range from $20.00 to $150. Usually the crowns match the colours and materials of the dresses, but some dancers choose to wear tiaras, or tiaras with a fabric crown. The championship competitions are usually danced on stages with a lot of lighting. To prevent looking washed out, dancers often wear stage makeup and tan their legs. A rule was put in place in January 2005 for Under 10 dancers forbidding them to wear fake tan, and in October 2005 it was decided that Under 12 dancers who were in the Beginner and Primary levels would not be allowed to wear fake tan or make up.

text: The boys used to wear jackets and kilts, but now more commonly perform in black trousers with a colorful vest and tie and, more frequently, a vest with embroidery and crystals.

text: Festival costumes[edit]

text: The festival style differs, styling more towards a simple unified design, not using much detail or diamonds. Irish dance festivals (also called "shows") have dancers wear their hair either in a wig or down, depending on the age and level of the dancer.

text: Shoes[edit]

text: Three types of shoes are worn in competitive step dancing: hard shoes and two kinds of soft shoe.

text: Hard shoes[edit]

text: Hard shoes, also known as the heavy shoes or jig shoes, are leather shoes in the style of an Oxford shoe but with a toe piece similar to the cleat on a tap shoe as well an extended heel, both of which enable the production of rhythmic sounds.[17]

text: Early 20th century dancers used a variety of shoes, including both those made of cowhide, which minimised sound production, and hobnail boots, which produced loud percussive sounds.[18] At this time, it was common for women to perform jigs and hornpipes in ordinary lightweight shoes, because their dances did not involve rhythmic percussion, but from the 1930s onward both men and women began to wear heavy leather shoes.[19] Although in Ireland, hard shoes were used only for heavy jigs and hornpipes, in Australia until the 1950s it was common practice to perform all dances in such heavy shoes.[20]

text: After An Coimisiún Le Rince Gaelacha banned the use of metal heel or toe pieces in the 1940s, ordinary shoes were modified with nails, coins or gravel in order to improve the clarity of sound and to emphasise the rhythms of the heavy dances.[19][21]

text: From the 1980s, toe pieces and heels were developed made from fibreglass or plastics, in response to lighter shoe leather with inferior sound production qualities, and with the aim of minimising damage caused to floors by nails. The lightweight nature of such materials allowed dancers to achieve more elevation in their steps,[17] and furthermore enabled entirely new movements to be incorporated into dances, such as pointe work in the balletic style on the very tip of the toe piece. A further innovation, the "bubble heel", which added an inwards protrusion to the hollow plastic heel, created a far louder sound when clicking the heels together than was possible in tradtional leather-heeled shoes.[22] An Coimisiún later outlawed bubble heels in competition, but plastic heels continued to enable "click" movements. Dancing en pointe was popularised further by the introduction of shoes with modified, more flexible soles.[22][23]

text: It is common for an intricate but entirely cosmetic buckle to be added to hard shoes for competition, in the shape of a shamrock or other appropriate form.[24]

text: Commercially available hard shoes are priced at between US$100 and $150.[25]

text: Soft shoes[edit]

text: Until the early 20th century, reels and slip jigs were performed in ordinary walking shoes, as with heavy jigs and hornpipes. Beginning at the dancing competition of the 1924 Tailteann Games in Dublin, a style of ballet pump held on by a looped piece of elastic was introduced for these dances. The increased popularity of these shoes over the following decades contributed to a more balletic style in the slip jig which eventually led to this dance being performed exclusively by women.[26]

text: In the latter half of the 20th century, the pumps changed to a low cut type with crossed laces similar to the Scottish ghillie. This modern type of shoe, however, differs from the traditional Scottish footwear with a shorter toe box and round laces. A number of variations on this type are available, including variants with softer leather and split soles.[24] This change was motivated by a desire to highlight the position of feet to adjudicators, as the usual black colour of the pumps contrasted with the exposed white of the poodle socks.[26] The flexible nature of these shoes enables rapid and graceful movement as well as elevation in the dancer's performance.[17]

text: These soft shoes cost around $40 when purchased new.[25]

text: Until the 1970s, it was common for men to wear the pumps as well, particularly when competing in the slip jig, but at this time, An Coimisiún introduced legislation restricting their use to boys under the age of 11. Consequently, a new style of she was adopted for men similar to the contemporary hard shoe, with the toe piece and ankle strap removed but the fibreglass heel retained.[27] This second type of soft shoe, often known as the "reel shoe", is worn exclusively by male dancers, although younger male dancers are occasionally encouraged to begin in jazz shoes which are similar apart from the heel.[24]

text: Competitive step dance[edit]

text: Organisations[edit]

text: From the late 1800s, when the Gaelic League began to organise cultural festivals to promote the cause of Irish nationalism, Irish step dance developed a competitive element. Throughout the 20th century, structures for competition developed and spread across the world.

text: Several organisations, many of which at various stages separated from the Gaelic League's An Coimisiún Le Rincí Gaelacha, independently organise Irish dancing competitions, both in Ireland and elsewhere. In addition to An Coimisiún, Irish step dance is regulated by An Comhdháil Múinteoirí Na Rincí Gaelacha, Cumann Rince Náisiúnta, the World Irish Dance Association, the Festival Irish Dance Teachers Association, and others.[28]

text: A number of smaller organisations are described as "open platform", meaning that dancers and teachers may affiliate with and compete under other open platform organisations. Open platform organisations also adhere to broad mission statements rather than strict hierarchy, in an attempt to appeal to dance teachers wishing to remain independent.[28] An Coimisiún and An Comhdháil are primarily closed to competitors from other organisations, but operate open platform competitions in areas with fewer members.[29]

text: Accreditation[edit]

text: Irish step dance organisations generally require their teachers and adjudicators to be qualified by the governing body. Most follow the structure set by An Coimisiún, the most important qualifications of which are the TCRG (qualification to teach) and the ADCRG (qualification to adjudicate). These qualifications are awarded by examinations which test practical and theoretical knowledge of traditional and original steps for both step dance and ceili dancing.[30][31] An Comhdháil and some other organisations recognise the qualifications awarded by An Coimisiún,[32] but An Coimisiún only recognises teachers and adjudicators qualified under their own examinations.[33]

text: Events[edit]

text: A feis (/ˈfɛʃ/, plural feiseanna) is a competitive step dance event. The word "feis" means "festival" in Irish, and traditionally consists of dancing competitions as well as competition in music and traditional crafts. Many modern feiseanna, however, are solely Irish dancing events.[34] At a feis, several grades of competition are typically offered, in accordance with regional practice and the rules of the governing organisation. These grades may be based on a dancer's level of experience or their previous results in feiseanna.[35] A feis competition is generally judged by between one and three adjudicators, depending on the size of the event and local organisation rules. Dancers compete in sections of one solo dance at a time, and feiseanna may also include competitions for ceili dances.

text: An oireachtas (plural oireachtais or oireachtasi) or championship competition is a larger and usually annual Irish dancing competition. The first oireachtas, established by the Gaelic League, was inspired by the Welsh eisteddfod and was conceived as an Irish national festival.[36] An oireachtas is often the highest-level competition for a region or country, such as Oireachtas Rince Na hEirann (The All-Ireland Championships) or the North American Irish Dancing Championships. Oireachtais operate at only one level of competition and are judged by multiple adjudicators. In An Coimisiún oireachtais, dancers perform three dances in consecutive rounds and are placed according to their cumulative scores. Like feiseanna, oireachtais may include competitions for ceili dances.[37]

text: Many of the larger organisations operate an annual World Championships for their organisation's dancers.[28] The largest and oldest of these is An Coimisiún's Oireachtas Rince Na Cruinne, which was established in 1970, and involves up to 3000 competing dancers who have qualified at regional and national oireachtais.[37]

text: In performance[edit]

text: At the 1897 general meeting of the Gaelic League, displays of dancing were observed to be more popular than the speeches and debates. The public performance of step dance, therefore, evolved with the organisation of social dances as a means for the Gaelic League to ensure both ongoing popularity and financial stability for its revolutionary activities.[38]

text: Riverdance was the interval act in the 1994 Eurovision Song Contest which contributed to the popularity of Irish stepdance, and is still considered a significant watershed in Irish culture.[39] Its roots are in a three-part suite of baroque-influenced traditional music called "Timedance" composed, recorded and performed for the 1994 contest, which was hosted in Ireland. This first performance featured American-born Irish dancing champions Jean Butler and Michael Flatley, the RTÉ Concert Orchestra and the Celtic choral group Anúna with a score written by Bill Whelan. Riverdance's success includes an eight-week sell out season at Radio City Music Hall, New York, with the sales of merchandise resulting in Radio City Music Hall merchandise sale's record smashed during the first performance, sell-out tours at King's Hall, Belfast, Northern Ireland, and The Green Glens Arena, Millstreet, Co. Cork, Ireland, plus a huge three and a half-month return to The Apollo in Hammersmith with advance ticket sales of over £5,000,000.

text: After Flatley left Riverdance, he created other Irish dance shows including Lord of the Dance, Celtic Tiger Live and Feet of Flames, the last-named being an expansion of Lord of the Dance.

text: In the media[edit]

text: A 2007 RTÉ reality television program, Celebrity Jigs 'n' Reels, combined traditional stepdance with modern music and choreography in a competitive format which paired celebrities with professional dancers. Competitors were judged by well-known stepdancers including Jean Butler and Colin Dunne.[40]

text: The 2011 Sue Bourne documentary film Jig followed eight dancers as they prepared for An Coimisiún's 2010 World Championships in Glasgow.[41] On its release, the film was praised for attention to technical aspects of stepdance, but criticised for failing to explain the historical and socio-political context of the event.[42]

text: TLC acquired the rights to the documentary in preparation for a new television show about the competitive Irish stepdance world in America, for which the working title is Irish Dancing Tweens. The series, which will be produced by Sirens Media, features several dance schools. Each episode will focus on individual dancers during rehearsals, preparation, travel, and during competitions. Eight episodes of the series have been ordered.[43][44]

text: In 2014, BBC One produced a six-part documentary series called Jigs and Wigs: The Extreme World of Irish Dancing, which featured "the unusual individuals and the stories" of stepdance.[45] The series was noted for its focus on the extreme elements of the modern Irish stepdance world, and the increasing financial pressures on competitors.[46] Reviewers also noted that Jigs and Wigs presented a stepdance world increasingly divorced from perceived Celtic traditions.[47]


document_title: Same-sex marriage in the United States

question_text: if a couple is married in one state they are married in all 50 states due to the

question_tokens: if a couple is married in one state they are married in all 50 states due to the

root

text: Same-sex marriage in the United States

text: History[edit]

text: The movement to obtain civil marriage rights and benefits for same-sex couples in the United States began in the 1970s.[4] In the 1971 case Baker v. Nelson, the Minnesota Supreme Court ruled that denying marriage licenses to same-sex couples did not violate the U.S. Constitution. On appeal, the United States Supreme Court denied to hear the case, establishing it as a federal precedent as it came from a mandatory appellate review. The issue did not become prominent in U.S. politics until the 1993 Hawaii Supreme Court decision in Baehr v. Lewin that declared that state's prohibition to be unconstitutional.[9]

tag: p

text: During the 21st century, while several countries elsewhere in the world were opening marriage for same-sex couples, public support in the U.S. for same-sex marriage has grown considerably,[10][11] and national polls conducted since 2011 show that a majority of Americans support legalizing it. However at the same time, many states also passed bans against same-sex marriage, either legislatively or by referendum.[12] On May 17, 2004, Massachusetts became the first U.S. state and the sixth jurisdiction in the world to legalize same-sex marriage following the Supreme Judicial Court's decision in Goodridge v. Department of Public Health six months earlier.[13] On May 9, 2012, Barack Obama became the first sitting U.S. President to publicly declare support for the legalization of same-sex marriage.[14] On November 6, 2012, Maine, Maryland and Washington became the first states to legalize same-sex marriage through popular vote.

text: In June 2013, the Supreme Court ruled in United States v. Windsor that federal law could not treat as unequal, marriages that individual states had created as equally valid, when it overturned a key provision of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), thus forcing federal recognition of same-sex marriage and marriage-related benefits when related to a same-sex marriage performed by a state that sanctioned such marriages. In the two years following Windsor, U.S. district courts in 27 states[a] and state courts in six states,[b] plus one state court ruling addressing only the recognition of same-sex marriages from other jurisdictions,[c] found that same-sex marriage bans violate the U.S. Constitution, while two U.S. district courts[d] and one state court[e] found that they did not. The flow of federal appeal cases rejecting same-sex marriage bans was finally interrupted in November 2014. In contrast to all other circuits that had ruled at the time, the Sixth Circuit ruled such bans to be constitutional. The panel ruling reversed six U.S. district court rulings that had found bans on same-sex marriage or its recognition to be unconstitutional, reinstating State bans in the four states served by that circuit (Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio and Tennessee).[f][49]

text: On January 16, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear four cases, on appeal from the Sixth Circuit, on whether states may constitutionally ban same-sex marriages or refuse to recognize such marriages legally performed in another state. The cases were: Obergefell v. Hodges (Ohio), Tanco v. Haslam (Tennessee), DeBoer v. Snyder (Michigan), and Bourke v. Beshear (Kentucky). Decided by the court under the heading of Obergefell on June 26, 2015, a 5–4 majority of justices led by Justice Anthony Kennedy reversed the Sixth Circuit's upholding of state bans and declared that the Court's rulings must evolve in the light of better understanding of discrimination and the constitutional protections available to protect minorities, and that same-sex couples have the constitutional rights to marry and to have their marriages recognized.[50] Obergefell therefore overturned the Court's own prior ruling in Baker.

text: Before Obergefell[edit]

text:
v
t
e

tag: ul

text: Prior to Obergefell, same-sex marriage was legal to at least some degree in thirty-eight states, one territory (Guam) and the District of Columbia; of the states, Missouri, Kansas, and Alabama had restrictions. Until United States v. Windsor, it was only legal in 12 states and Washington D.C.. Beginning in July 2013, over forty federal and state courts cited Windsor to strike down state bans on the licensing or recognition of same-sex marriage. Missouri recognized same-sex marriages from out of state and same-sex marriages licensed by the City of St. Louis under two separate state court orders; two other jurisdictions issued such licenses as well. In Kansas, marriage licenses were available to same-sex couples in most counties, but the state did not recognize their validity. Some counties in Alabama issued marriage licenses to same-sex couples for three weeks until the state Supreme Court ordered probate judges to stop doing so. That court's ruling did not address the recognition of same-sex marriages already licensed in Alabama, but referred to them as "purported 'marriage licenses'".[51] In two additional states, same-sex marriages were previously legal between the time their bans were struck down and then stayed. Michigan recognized the validity of more than 300 marriage licenses issued to same-sex couples and those marriages. Arkansas recognized the more than 500 marriage licenses issued to same-sex couples there,[52] and the Federal Government had not taken a position on Arkansas's marriage licenses.

text: Legal issues[edit]

text: The legal issues surrounding same-sex marriage in the United States are determined by the nation's federal system of government, in which the status of a person, including marital status, is determined in large measure by the individual states. Prior to 1996, the Federal Government did not define marriage; any marriage recognized by a state was recognized by the Federal Government, even if that marriage was not recognized by one or more states, as was the case until 1967 with interracial marriage, which some states banned by statute.

text: Prior to 2004, same-sex marriage was not performed in any U.S. jurisdiction. It was subsequently legalized in different jurisdictions through legislation, court rulings,[53] tribal council rulings,[54] and popular vote in referenda.[55][56][57]

text: The Supreme Court's ruling in Obergefell renders moot any remaining legal challenges, as it specifically orders states to both issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, and to recognize as valid marriages performed in other states.[58]

text: Federal law[edit]

text: According to the Federal Government's Government Accountability Office (GAO) in 2004, more than 1,138 rights and protections are conferred to U.S. citizens upon marriage by the Federal Government; areas affected include Social Security benefits, veterans' benefits, health insurance, Medicaid, hospital visitation, estate taxes, retirement savings, pensions, family leave, and immigration law.[59]

text: Since July 9, 2015, married same-sex couples throughout the United States have equal access to all the federal benefits that married opposite-sex couples have.[60]

text: The Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) was enacted in 1996. DOMA's Section 2 says that no state needs to recognize the legal validity of a same-sex relationship even if recognized as marriage by another state. It purports to relieve a state of its reciprocal obligation to honor the laws of other states as required by the Constitution's full faith and credit clause.[61] Even before DOMA, however, states sometimes refused to recognize a marriage from another jurisdiction if it was counter to its "strongly held public policies".[62] Most lawsuits that seek to require a state to recognize a marriage established in another jurisdiction argue on the basis of equal protection and due process, not the full faith and credit clause.[g]

text: DOMA's Section 3 defined marriage for the purposes of federal law as a union of one man and one woman.[65] It was challenged in the federal courts. On July 8, 2010, Judge Joseph Tauro of the District Court of Massachusetts held that the denial of federal rights and benefits to lawfully married Massachusetts same-sex couples is unconstitutional under the equal protection clause of the U.S. Constitution.[66] Beginning in 2010, eight federal courts found DOMA Section 3 unconstitutional in cases involving bankruptcy, public employee benefits, estate taxes, and immigration.[67][68][69] On October 18, 2012, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals became the first court to hold sexual orientation to be a quasi-suspect classification and applied intermediate scrutiny to strike down Section 3 of DOMA as unconstitutional in Windsor v. United States.[70] The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Windsor on June 26, 2013, that Section 3 violated the Fifth Amendment.[71][h]

text: As a result of the Windsor decision, married same-sex couples—regardless of domicile—have federal tax benefits (including the ability to file joint federal income tax returns), military benefits, federal employment benefits, and immigration benefits.[72][73][74][75] In February 2014, the Justice Department expanded federal recognition of same-sex marriages to include bankruptcies, prison visits, survivor benefits and refusing to testify against a spouse.[76] Likewise in June 2014, family medical leave benefits under the Family Medical Leave Act 1975 were extended to married same-sex couples.[77] With respect to social security and veterans benefits, same-sex married couples are eligible for full benefits from the Veterans Affairs (VA) and the Social Security Administration (SSA). Prior to the Supreme Court's ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges on June 26, 2015, the VA and SSA could provide only limited benefits to married same-sex couples living in states where same-sex marriage was not legal.[78][79] Effective March 27, 2015, the definition of spouse under the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993[80] includes employees in a same-sex marriage regardless of state of residence.[81] Following the Obergefell decision, the Justice Department extended all federal marriage benefits to married same-sex couples nationwide.[60]

text: The Federal Government recognizes the marriages of same-sex couples who married in certain states in which same-sex marriage was legal for brief periods between the time a court order allowed such couples to marry and that court order was stayed, including Michigan. The Federal Government also recognized marriages performed in Utah from December 20, 2013 to January 6, 2014, even while the state didn't. Under similar circumstances, the Federal Government never took a position on Indiana or Wisconsin's marriages performed in brief periods, though it did recognize them once the respective states announced they would do so. It had not taken a position with respect to similar marriages in Arkansas[82] prior to the Obergefell decision legalizing and recognizing same-sex marriages in all 50 states.

text: Opponents of same-sex marriage have worked to prevent individual states from recognizing same-sex unions by attempting to amend the United States Constitution to define marriage as a union between one man and one woman. In 2006, the Federal Marriage Amendment, which would prohibit states from recognizing same-sex marriages, was approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee on a party-line vote and was debated by the full Senate, but was ultimately defeated in both houses of Congress.[83] On April 2, 2014, the Alabama State House adopted a resolution calling for a constitutional convention to propose an amendment to ban same-sex marriage nationwide.[84]

text: State and territorial recognition[edit]

text: Same-sex marriages are licensed in and recognized by all U.S. states and Washington, D.C., as well as all U.S. territories except American Samoa.[85] On July 3, 2015, the Attorney General for American Samoa stated "we are reviewing the opinion [Obergefell v. Hodges] and its potential applicability to American Samoa, and will provide comment when it is completed."[86] On January 6, 2016, Alabama's Chief Justice, Roy Moore, issued a ruling forbidding state officials from issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples.[87] The ruling had no effect and all Alabama counties continued either issuing marriage licenses to all couples or not issue licenses at all, and in May 2016 Moore was charged with ethics violations by the state Judicial Inquiry Commission for the ruling,[88] subsequently being suspended from the bench for the remainder of his term on September 30 of that year.[89]

text: Counties not issuing marriage licenses[edit]

text: Officials of nine counties in two states, Texas and Alabama, are still unwilling to issue licenses to same-sex couples as of June 2017. Those wishing to marry within the state must travel to another part of the state in order to obtain a license. However, some counties may require at least one person to be a resident of the county in order to receive a marriage license.[91]

text:
Counties denying licenses to same-sex couples
(as of June 2017)[92][91]

Status
TX
AL
Total, U.S.

Issues licenses to opposite-sex couples only
1
0
1

Do not issue any marriage licenses
0
8
8

Total, by state
1
8
9

Percent of state population in said counties
0.006
6.0
0.09

tag: table

text:
Officials of one Texas county, Irion, issue marriage licenses but claim they will refuse same-sex couples. None have applied and no legal action has been taken.[90]
Officials in eight Alabama counties no longer issue any marriage licenses.[92][91] This is being done in accordance with a state law, which in 1961 was created to preserve racial segregation and made it optional for county clerks to issue marriage licenses. Several have chosen to exercise this option since the Obergefell ruling.[93]
Several Kentucky counties initially refused to marry same-sex couples. In response, Kentucky reformed its marriage license forms and removed the name of the county clerk from the licenses. As of June 2016, Chris Hartmann, director of the Kentucky-based Fairness Campaign, said to his knowledge "there are no counties where marriage licenses are being denied" in his state.[94]

text: Parental rights[edit]

text: Post-Obergefell, six states have, on occasion, attempted to deny same-sex couples full adoption rights to varying degrees. In Arkansas, Florida, Indiana, and Wisconsin, same-sex couples have been met with rejection when trying to get both parents' names listed on the birth certificate. Alabama's highest court attempted to void an adoption decree obtained by a same-sex couple in Georgia, but the U.S. Supreme Court reversed, restoring joint custody to the adoptive mother on March 7, 2016. Mississippi had once banned same-sex couples from adopting, but the law requiring this was ruled unconstitutional by the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi on March 31, 2016. The ruling was described as having the effect of making same-sex adoption essentially legal in all 50 states.[95][96]

text: On June 26, 2017, the Supreme Court ruled by a 6-3 vote in the case of Pavan v. Smith that under their decision in Obergefell, same-sex couples must be treated equally to opposite-sex couples in the issuance of birth certificates. In December 2016, the Supreme Court of Arkansas upheld a state law only allowing opposite-sex couples to be automatically listed as parents on their children's birth certificates, while prohibiting same-sex couples from being allowed the same on an equal basis. The Supreme Court summarily reversed the Arkansas Supreme Court, finding that the disparity in treatment was a violation of their decision in Obergefell.[97]

text: Tribal law[edit]

text: The Supreme Court decision legalizing same-sex marriage in the states and territories did not legalize same-sex marriage on Indian lands. In the United States, Congress (not the federal courts) has legal authority over Indian country. Thus, unless Congress passes a law regarding same-sex marriage on Indian tribes, federally recognized American Indian tribes have the legal right to form their own marriage laws.[98] As of the time of the Obergefell ruling, 24 tribal jurisdictions legally recognize same-sex marriage. Some tribes have passed legislation specifically addressing same-sex relationships and some specify that state law and jurisdiction govern tribal marriages. As of November 2017, same-sex marriage is legally recognized in 40 tribal jurisdictions.

text: Local laws prior to Obergefell v. Hodges[edit]

text: States and territories that fully licensed/recognized same-sex marriage[edit]

text: Note: This table shows only states that licensed and recognized same-sex marriages or had legalized them, before Obergefell v. Hodges. It does not include states that recognized same-sex marriages from other jurisdictions but did not license them.

text:
States and territories with same-sex marriage before Obergefell v. Hodges.

State or territory
Population[99]
Date of Enactment/Ruling
Date Effective
Legalization method
Details

 Alaska
736,732
000000002014-10-12-0000October 12, 2014
000000002014-10-17-0000October 17, 2014
Federal court decision
U.S. District Court for the District of Alaska ruling in Hamby v. Parnell.[100]

 Arizona
6,731,484
000000002014-10-17-0000October 17, 2014
000000002014-10-17-0000October 17, 2014
Federal court decision
U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona ruling in Connolly v. Jeanes and in Majors v. Horne.[101]

 California
38,802,500
000000002008-05-15-0000May 15, 2008
000000002008-06-16-0000June 16, 2008
State court decision → (Overturned by constitutional ban)
California Supreme Court ruling in In re Marriage Cases. Ceased via state constitutional amendment after Proposition 8 passed on November 5, 2008.

000000002010-08-04-0000August 4, 2010
000000002013-06-28-0000June 28, 2013
Federal court decision → legislative statute
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California ruling in Perry v. Schwarzenegger, finding Proposition 8 unconstitutional. Stayed during appeal, affirmed by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals as Perry v. Brown. Certiorari granted and appealed as Hollingsworth v. Perry to the U.S. Supreme Court; the high court dismissed Hollingsworth for lack of standing and vacated the Ninth Circuit decision below, resulting with the original decision in Perry left intact.[102] Gender-neutral marriage bill passed by the California State Legislature and signed into law took effect on January 1, 2015.[103]

 Colorado
5,355,866
000000002014-07-09-0000July 9, 2014
000000002014-10-07-0000October 7, 2014
State court decision
Colorado district court ruling in Brinkman v. Long

000000002014-07-23-0000July 23, 2014
Federal court decision
U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado ruling in Burns v. Hickenlooper

 Connecticut
3,596,677
000000002008-10-10-0000October 10, 2008
000000002008-11-12-0000November 12, 2008
State court decision → legislative statute
Connecticut Supreme Court ruling in Kerrigan v. Commissioner of Public Health; incorporated into state statutes in April 2009.

 Delaware
935,614
000000002013-05-07-0000May 7, 2013
000000002013-07-01-0000July 1, 2013
Legislative statute
Passed by the Delaware General Assembly and signed into law by the Governor of Delaware.

 District of Columbia
658,893
000000002009-12-18-0000December 18, 2009
000000002010-03-09-0000March 9, 2010
Legislative statute
Passed by the Council of the District of Columbia.

 Florida
19,893,297
000000002014-08-21-0000August 21, 2014
000000002015-01-06-0000January 6, 2015
Federal court decision
U.S. Northern District of Florida ruling in Brenner v. Scott.

 Guam
165,124 (not included in population total)
000000002015-06-05-0000June 5, 2015
000000002015-06-09-0000June 9, 2015
Binding federal court precedent → Actions of territorial officials → Federal court decision → Legislative statute
Attorney General Elizabeth Barrett-Anderson deferred to the controlling precedent set by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in Latta v. Otter, ordering that marriage licenses for same-sex couples be processed immediately beginning April 15, 2015.[104] District Court of Guam ruling in Aguero v. Calvo upholding the earlier decision by the Ninth Circuit.[105] In August 2015, the Guam Legislature passed a Marriage Equality Act statute, incorporating the decision.[106]

 Hawaii
1,419,561
000000002013-11-13-0000November 13, 2013
000000002013-12-02-0000December 2, 2013
Legislative statute
Hawaii Marriage Equality Act passed by Hawaii State Legislature and signed into law by the Governor of Hawaii.

 Idaho
1,634,464
000000002014-10-07-0000October 7, 2014
000000002014-10-15-0000October 15, 2014
Federal court decision
U.S. District Court for the District of Idaho ruling in Latta v. Otter,[107] upheld by the Ninth Circuit.[108]

 Illinois
12,880,580
000000002013-11-20-0000November 20, 2013
000000002014-06-01-0000June 1, 2014
Legislative statute
Passed by the Illinois General Assembly and signed into law by the Governor of Illinois.

 Indiana
6,596,855
000000002014-09-04-0000September 4, 2014
000000002014-10-06-0000October 6, 2014
Federal court decision
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana ruling in Baskin v. Bogan. The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's ruling.[109]

 Iowa
3,107,126
000000002009-04-03-0000April 3, 2009
000000002009-04-27-0000April 27, 2009
State court decision
Iowa Supreme Court ruling in Varnum v. Brien. One same-sex couple obtained a marriage licensed and married before initial ruling was stayed.[110]

 Maine
1,330,089
000000002012-11-06-0000November 6, 2012
000000002012-12-29-0000December 29, 2012
Initiative statute
Proposed by initiative as referendum Question 1, approved.

 Maryland
5,976,407
000000002012-11-06-0000November 6, 2012
000000002013-01-01-0000January 1, 2013
Legislative statute → referendum
Civil Marriage Protection Act passed by the Maryland General Assembly; petitioned to referendum Question 6, upheld.

 Massachusetts
6,745,408
000000002003-11-18-0000November 18, 2003
000000002004-05-17-0000May 17, 2004
State court decision
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruling in Goodridge v. Department of Public Health.

 Minnesota
5,457,173
000000002013-05-14-0000May 14, 2013
000000002013-08-01-0000August 1, 2013
Legislative statute
Passed by the Minnesota Legislature and signed into law by the Governor of Minnesota.

 Montana
1,023,579
000000002014-11-19-0000November 19, 2014
000000002014-11-19-0000November 19, 2014
Federal court decision
U.S. District Court for the District of Montana ruling in Rolando v. Fox.[37]

 Nevada
2,839,099
000000002014-10-07-0000October 7, 2014
000000002014-10-09-0000October 9, 2014
Federal court decision → legislative statute
Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling in Sevcik v. Sandoval. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals overturned the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada's ruling.[111] In 2017, the Nevada Legislature passed a bill that codified the Obergefell v. Hodges ruling in the state. The Governor of Nevada signed the bill and it went into effect on July 1.[112][113]

 New Hampshire
1,326,813
000000002009-06-03-0000June 3, 2009
000000002010-01-01-0000January 1, 2010
Legislative statute
Passed by New Hampshire General Court and signed into law by the Governor of New Hampshire.

 New Jersey
8,938,175
000000002013-09-27-0000September 27, 2013
000000002013-10-21-0000October 21, 2013
State court decision
New Jersey Superior Court ruling in Garden State Equality v. Dow

 New Mexico
2,085,572
000000002013-12-19-0000December 19, 2013
000000002013-12-19-0000December 19, 2013
State court decision
New Mexico Supreme Court ruling in Griego v. Oliver.

 New York
19,746,227
000000002011-06-24-0000June 24, 2011
000000002011-07-24-0000July 24, 2011
Legislative statute
Marriage Equality Act passed by New York State Legislature and signed into law by the Governor of New York.

 North Carolina
9,943,964
000000002014-10-10-0000October 10, 2014
000000002014-10-10-0000October 10, 2014
Federal court decision
U.S. District Court for the Western District of North Carolina ruling in General Synod of the United Church of Christ v. Cooper.[114]

 Oklahoma
3,878,051
000000002014-07-18-0000July 18, 2014
000000002014-10-06-0000October 6, 2014
Federal court decision
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma ruling in Bishop v. Oklahoma. The Tenth Circuit affirmed the ruling in Bishop v. Smith.[115]

 Oregon
3,970,239
000000002014-05-19-0000May 19, 2014
000000002014-05-19-0000May 19, 2014
Federal court decision → Legislative statute
U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon ruling in Geiger v. Kitzhaber. In July 2015, the Oregon Legislature passed a gender-neutral marriage law, incorporating the decision.[116]

 Pennsylvania
12,787,209
000000002014-05-20-0000May 20, 2014
000000002014-05-20-0000May 20, 2014
Federal court decision
U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania ruling in Whitewood v. Wolf.

 Rhode Island
1,055,173
000000002013-05-02-0000May 2, 2013
000000002013-08-01-0000August 1, 2013
Legislative statute
Passed by the Rhode Island General Assembly and signed into law by the Governor of Rhode Island.

 South Carolina
4,832,482
000000002014-11-12-0000November 12, 2014
000000002014-11-20-0000November 20, 2014
Federal court decision
U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina ruling in Condon v. Haley.[117]

 Utah
2,942,902
000000002014-06-25-0000June 25, 2014
000000002014-10-06-0000October 6, 2014
Federal court decision
U.S. District Court for the District of Utah ruling in Kitchen v. Herbert. Marriages licensed between December 20, 2013, and January 6, 2014. The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court ruling in Kitchen v. Herbert.

 Vermont
626,562
000000002009-04-07-0000April 7, 2009
000000002009-09-01-0000September 1, 2009
Legislative statute
Passed by the Vermont General Assembly, overriding Governor Jim Douglas' veto.

 Virginia
8,326,289
000000002014-07-28-0000July 28, 2014
000000002014-10-06-0000October 6, 2014
Federal court decision
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia ruling in Bostic v. Rainey.[118] The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the U.S. district court ruling in Bostic v. Schaefer.[119]

 Washington
7,061,530
000000002012-11-06-0000November 6, 2012
000000002012-12-06-0000December 6, 2012
Legislative statute → referendum
Passed by the Washington State Legislature; suspended by petition and referred to Referendum 74, approved.

 West Virginia
1,850,326
000000002014-10-09-0000October 9, 2014
000000002014-10-09-0000October 9, 2014
Binding federal court precedent → Actions of state officials → Federal court decision
Governor Earl Ray Tomblin and state Attorney General Patrick Morrisey, recognizing the precedent established by the Fourth Circuit ruling in Bostic v. Schaefer, dropped their defense of the state's same-sex marriage ban.[120] The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia in McGee v. Cole overturned West Virginia's statutory ban on same-sex marriage on November 7, 2014.[121]

 Wisconsin
5,757,564
000000002014-09-04-0000September 4, 2014
000000002014-10-06-0000October 6, 2014
Federal court decision
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin ruling in Wolf v. Walker. The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's ruling.[122]

 Wyoming
584,153
000000002014-10-17-0000October 17, 2014
000000002014-10-21-0000October 21, 2014
Federal court decision
U.S. District Court for the District of Wyoming ruling in Guzzo v. Mead.[123]

Total
221,434,635 (7001694000000000000♠69.4% of the U.S. population)

text: Debate[edit]

text: Support[edit]

text: Same-sex marriage supporters make several arguments in support of their position. Gail Mathabane likens prohibitions on same-sex marriage to past U.S. prohibitions on interracial marriage.[124] Fernando Espuelas argues that same-sex marriage should be allowed because same-sex marriage extends a civil right to a minority group.[125] According to an American history scholar, Nancy Cott, "there really is no comparison, because there is nothing that is like marriage except marriage."[126]

text: The Human Rights Campaign (HRC) is one of the leading advocacy groups in support of same-sex marriage. According to the HRC's website, "Many same-sex couples want the right to legally marry because they are in love—many, in fact, have spent the last 10, 20 or 50 years with that person—and they want to honor their relationship in the greatest way our society has to offer, by making a public commitment to stand together in good times and bad, through all the joys and challenges family life brings."[127]

text: In the United States, such professional organizations as the American Psychiatric Association, American Psychological Association, American Sociological Association, American Anthropological Association, American Medical Association, American Academy of Pediatrics, American Academy of Nursing, and National Association of Social Workers have said that claims that the legal recognition of marriage for same–sex couples undermines the institution of marriage and harms children are inconsistent with the scientific evidence supporting the conclusions: that homosexuality is a normal expression of human sexuality that is not chosen; that gay and lesbian people form stable, committed relationships essentially equivalent to heterosexual relationships; that same-sex parents are no less capable than opposite-sex parents to raise children; that no civilization or viable social order depends on an institution of exclusive heterosexual marriage; and that the children of same-sex parents are no less psychologically healthy and well-adjusted than children of opposite-sex parents.[128][129][130][131][132][133][134][135] The body of research strongly supports the conclusion that discrimination by the Federal Government between married same-sex couples and married opposite-sex couples in granting benefits unfairly stigmatizes same-sex couples. The research also contradicts the stereotype-based rationales advanced to support passage of DOMA that the Equal Protection Clause was designed to prohibit.[136]

text: The 2012 Democratic Party Platform used the term "marriage equality" in its expression of support.[137]

text: Role of social media[edit]

text: Supporters of the legalization of same-sex marriage have successfully used social media websites such as Facebook to help achieve that goal.[138][139][140] Some have argued that the successful use of social media websites by LGBT groups has played a key role in the defeat of religion-based opposition.[141]

text: One of the largest scale uses of social media to mobilize support for same-sex marriage preceded and coincided with the arrival at the U.S. Supreme Court of high-profile legal cases for Proposition 8 and the Defense of Marriage Act in March 2013. The "red equals sign" project started by the Human Rights Campaign was an electronic campaign primarily based on Facebook that encouraged users to change their profile images to a red equal sign to express support for same-sex marriage.[142] At the time of the court hearings, it was estimated that approximately 2.5 million Facebook users changed their profile images to a red equals sign.[143]

text: Opposition[edit]

text: Opponents of same-sex marriage in the United States ground their arguments on parenting concerns, religious concerns, concerns that changes to the definition of marriage would lead to the inclusion of polygamy or incest, natural law-based reasoning, and tradition.[144] The Southern Baptist Convention adopted a statement in June 2003 that legalizing same-sex relationships would "convey a societal approval of a homosexual lifestyle, which the Bible calls sinful and dangerous both to the individuals involved and to society at large".[145] The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, the Southern Baptist Convention, and National Organization for Marriage claim that children do best when raised by a mother and father, and that legalizing same-sex marriage is, therefore, contrary to the best interests of children.[146][147][148][149] Maggie Gallagher of the National Organization for Marriage has raised concerns about the impact of same-sex marriage upon religious liberty and upon faith-based charities in the United States.[150] Opponents of same-sex marriage have claimed that redefining marriage to include same-sex relationships would have harmful effects on biological family, children's rights, and social welfare.[151][152] Stanley Kurtz of the Weekly Standard has written that same-sex marriage would eventually lead to the legalization of polygamy and polyamory, or group marriage, in the United States.[153]

text: The funding of the amendment referendum campaigns has been an issue of great dispute. Both judges[154][155] and the IRS[156] have ruled that it is either questionable or illegal for campaign contributions to be shielded by anonymity. In February 2012, the National Organization for Marriage vowed to spend in Washington legislative races to defeat the Republican state senators who voted for same-sex marriage.[157]

text: Politicians and media figures[edit]

text: President Obama's views on same-sex marriage have varied over the course of his political career and become more consistently supportive of same-sex marriage rights over time. In the 1990s, he had supported same-sex marriage while campaigning for the Illinois Senate.[158][159] During the 2008 presidential campaign, he said: "I believe that marriage is the union between a man and a woman. For me as a Christian, it is a sacred union. You know, God is in the mix."[160] He opposed the 2008 California referendum that aimed at reversing a court ruling establishing same-sex marriage there.[161] In 2009, he opposed two opposing federal legislative proposals that would have banned or established same-sex marriage nationally, stating that each state had to decide the issue.[162][163] In December 2010, he expressed support for civil unions with rights equivalent to marriage and for federal recognition of same-sex relationships. He opposed a federal constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage.[164] He also stated that his position on same-sex marriage was "evolving" and that he recognized that civil unions from the perspective of same-sex couples was "not enough".[165] On May 9, 2012, President Obama became the first sitting president to say he believed that same-sex couples should be allowed to marry. He still said the legal question belonged to the states.[14][166] In October 2014, Obama told an interviewer that his view had changed:[167]

text: Ultimately, I think the Equal Protection Clause does guarantee same-sex marriage in all fifty states. But, as you know, courts have always been strategic. There have been times where the stars were aligned and the Court, like a thunderbolt, issues a ruling like Brown v. Board of Education, but that's pretty rare. And, given the direction of society, for the Court to have allowed the process to play out the way it has may make the shift less controversial and more lasting.

text: Shortly after winning the 2016 election, President Donald Trump said he's "fine" with same-sex marriage and believes it to be settled law: "It's law. It was settled in the Supreme Court. I mean, it's done."[168] This somewhat contrasted with a previous statement he made in June 2015, after Obergefell v. Hodges, in which he said he's personally for "traditional marriage" and that he believed same-sex marriage should be left to the states.[169] In that same statement, however, Trump admitted that overturning Obergefell is not realistic. Several of his federal appointments have also, subsequently, announced they will uphold same-sex marriage and enforce the Supreme Court ruling, while still, in some cases, personally opposing same-sex marriage,[170] namely Attorney General Jeff Sessions and Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos.[171]

text: Former presidents Bill Clinton,[172] Jimmy Carter[173] and Barack Obama, former vice presidents Dick Cheney,[174] Al Gore,[175] Walter Mondale,[176] and Joe Biden have voiced their support for legal recognition, as have former first ladies Laura Bush,[177] Hillary Clinton,[178] Michelle Obama[179] and Nancy Reagan.[180] Former president George H. W. Bush and his wife former first lady Barbara Bush have served as witnesses to a same-sex wedding, but neither has publicly stated whether this means they support same-sex marriage in general;[181] George W. Bush reportedly offered to officiate the same wedding,[182] but has similarly not made a public statement regarding his position on the issue (as president, he was opposed). Fifteen U.S. senators announced their support in the spring of 2013.[183] By April 2013, a majority of the Senate had expressed support for same-sex marriage.[184] Senator Rob Portman of Ohio became the first sitting Republican senator to endorse same-sex marriage in March 2013,[185] followed by Senator Mark Kirk of Illinois in April,[186] Lisa Murkowski of Alaska in June,[187] and Susan Collins of Maine a year later.[188]

text: During the 2008 presidential election campaign, Republican vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin stated: "I have voted along with the vast majority of Alaskans who had the opportunity to vote to amend our Constitution defining marriage as between one man and one woman. I wish on a federal level that that's where we would go because I don't support gay marriage."[189]

text: When a U.S. district court invalidated the California referendum that ended same-sex marriages there in 2008, former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich said it showed "an outrageous disrespect for our Constitution and for the majority of people of the United States who believe marriage is the union of husband and wife".[190] By the end of 2012, Gingrich was prepared to accept civil—but not religious—same-sex marriages and encouraged the Republican Party to accept the fact of same-sex marriage was certain to become legal in more and more states.[191]

text: In an interview on The O'Reilly Factor in August 2010, when Glenn Beck was asked if he "believe(s) that gay marriage is a threat to [this] country in any way", he stated, "No I don't. ... I believe that Thomas Jefferson said: 'If it neither breaks my leg nor picks my pocket what difference is it to me?'"[192][193]

text: On his radio show in August 2010, commentator Rush Limbaugh said: "Marriage? There's a definition of it, for it. It means something. Marriage is a union of a man and woman. It's always been that. If you want to get married and you're a man, marry a woman. Nobody's stopping you. This is about tearing apart an institution."[194]

text: Public opinion[edit]

text: A CNN poll on February 19, 2015 found that 63% of Americans believe gays and lesbians have a constitutional right to marry, up from 49% in August 2010.[195] In the wake of the Obergefell decision, CNN polling found that 59% of Americans felt the decision was correct.[196]

text: A Washington Post/ABC News poll from February–March 2014 found a record high of 59% of Americans approve of same-sex marriage, with only 34% opposed and 7% with no opinion.[197] In May 2013, a Gallup poll showed that 53% of Americans would vote for a law legalizing same-sex marriage in all 50 states. Three previous readings over the course of a year consistently showed support at 50% or above. Gallup noted: "Just three years ago, support for gay marriage was 44%. The current 53% level of support is essentially double the 27% in Gallup's initial measurement on gay marriage, in 1996."[198] Some commentators, however, have noted instances where polling data has understated voter opposition to referendums banning same-sex marriage.[199] One 2010 study concluded that "polls on gay marriage ballot initiatives generally under-estimate the opposition to gay marriage by about seven percentage points".[200]

text: As of 2013[update], public support for same-sex marriage in the United States has solidified above 50%.[201][202][203] Public support for same-sex marriage has grown at an increasing pace since the 1990s.[10] In 1996, just 25% of Americans supported legalization of same-sex marriage. Polls have shown that support is identical among whites and Hispanics, while support for same-sex marriage trails among blacks.[204] Polling trends in 2010 and 2011 showed support for same-sex marriage gaining a majority, although the difference is within the error limit of the analysis.[205] On May 20, 2011, Gallup reported majority support for same-sex marriage for the first time in the country.[206] In June 2011, two prominent polling organizations released an analysis of the changing trend in public opinion about same-sex marriage in the United States, concluding that "public support for the freedom to marry has increased, at an accelerating rate, with most polls showing that a majority of Americans now support full marriage rights for all Americans."[207] Gallup's annual Values and Beliefs poll, conducted in May 2017, found that 64% of U.S. adults say same-sex marriages should be recognized by the law as valid, the highest percentage of support recorded to date by the polling firm.[208]

text: By 2017, according to a PRRI poll, same-sex marriage enjoyed popular support in all but 6 U.S. states. Of these 6 states, 3 had an outright majority against same-sex marriage (Arkansas, Mississippi and West Virginia), while the 3 others had a plurality against same-sex marriage but not a majority (Alabama, Louisiana and South Carolina). The state of North Dakota was evenly split, while the 43 remaining states all supported same-sex marriage, going from 74% support in Massachusetts to a plurality of 49% in Kentucky, North Carolina, Tennessee and Wyoming.[209]

text: Effects of same-sex marriage[edit]

text: Economic impact on same-sex couples[edit]

text: Until the Supreme Court's June 2013 ruling in United States v. Windsor required the Federal Government to treat legally married same-sex couples on an equal basis with heterosexual married couples, same-sex married couples faced severe disadvantages. The Federal Government did not recognize those marriages for any purpose. According to a 1997 General Accounting Office study, at least 1,049 U.S. federal laws and regulations include references to marital status.[210] A 2004 study by the Congressional Budget Office found 1,138 statutory provisions "in which marital status is a factor in determining or receiving 'benefits, rights, and privileges.'"[211] Many of these laws govern property rights, benefits, and taxation. Same-sex couples whose marriages are not recognized by the federal government are ineligible for spousal and survivor Social Security benefits and are ineligible for the benefits due the spouse of a federal government employee.[211] One study found that the difference in Social Security income for same-sex couples compared to opposite-sex married couples was per year.[212]

text: Compared to similarly situated opposite-sex married couples, same-sex couples faced the following financial and legal disadvantages:

text:
Legal costs associated with obtaining domestic partner documents to gain legal abilities granted automatically by legal marriage, including power of attorney, health care decision-making, and inheritance[212]
A person can inherit an unlimited amount from a deceased spouse without incurring an estate tax, but is subject to taxes if inheriting from a same-sex partner[211]
Same-sex couples were not eligible to file jointly as a married couple and thus could not take the advantages of lower tax rates when the individual income of the partners differs significantly[211][i]
Employer-provided health insurance coverage for a same-sex partner incurred federal income tax[211]
Higher health costs associated with lack of insurance and preventative care: 20% of same-sex couples had a member who was uninsured compared to 10% of married opposite-sex couples[212]
Inability to protect jointly owned home from loss due to costs of potential medical catastrophe[212]
Inability of a U.S. citizen to sponsor a same-sex spouse for citizenship[212]

text: Some 7,400 companies were offering spousal benefits to same-sex couples as of 2008[update]. In states that recognized same-sex marriages, same-sex couples could continue to receive those same benefits only if they married.[214] Only 18% of private employers offered domestic partner health care benefits.[212]

text: Same-sex couples face the same financial constraints of legal marriage as opposite-sex married couples, including the marriage penalty in taxation.[211] While social service providers usually do not count one partner's assets toward the income means test for welfare and disability assistance for the other partner, a legally married couple's joint assets are normally used in calculating whether a married individual qualifies for assistance.[211]

text: Economic impact on the Federal Government[edit]

text: The 2004 Congressional Budget Office study, working from an assumption "that about 0.6 percent of adults would enter into same-sex marriages if they had the opportunity" (an assumption in which they admitted "significant uncertainty") estimated that legalizing same-sex marriage throughout the United States "would improve the budget's bottom line to a small extent: by less than $1 billion in each of the next 10 years". This result reflects an increase in net government revenues (increased income taxes due to marriage penalties more than offsetting decreased tax revenues arising from postponed estate taxes). Marriage recognition would increase the government expenses for Social Security and Federal Employee Health Benefits but that increase would be more than made up for by decreased expenses for Medicaid, Medicare, and Supplemental Security Income.[211]

text: Mental health[edit]

text: Based in part on research that has been conducted on the adverse effects of stigmatization of gays and lesbians, numerous prominent social science organizations have issued position statements supporting same-sex marriage and opposing discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation; these organizations include the American Psychoanalytic Association and the American Psychological Association.[136]

text: Several psychological studies[215][216][217] have shown that an increase in exposure to negative conversations and media messages about same-sex marriage creates a harmful environment for the LGBT population that may affect their health and well-being.

text: One study surveyed more than 1,500 lesbian, gay and bisexual adults across the nation and found that respondents from the 25 states that have outlawed same-sex marriage had the highest reports of "minority stress"—the chronic social stress that results from minority-group stigmatization—as well as general psychological distress. According to the study, the negative campaigning that comes with a ban is directly responsible for the increased stress. Past research has shown that minority stress is linked to health risks such as risky sexual behavior and substance abuse.[218]

text: Two other studies examined personal reports from LGBT adults and their families living in Memphis, Tennessee, immediately after a successful 2006 ballot campaign banned same-sex marriage. Most respondents reported feeling alienated from their communities. The studies also found that families experienced a kind of secondary minority stress, says Jennifer Arm, a counseling graduate student at the University of Memphis.[219]

text: At the Perry v. Schwarzenegger trial, expert witness Ilan Meyer testified that the mental health outcomes for gays and lesbians would improve if laws such as Proposition 8 did not exist because "when people are exposed to more stress...they are more likely to get sick..." and that particular situation is consistent with laws that say to gay people "you are not welcome here, your relationships are not valued." Such laws have "significant power", he said.[220]

text: Physical health[edit]

text: In 2009, a pair of economists at Emory University tied the passage of state bans on same-sex marriage in the US to an increase in the rates of HIV infection.[221][222] The study linked the passage of same-sex marriage ban in a state to an increase in the annual HIV rate within that state of roughly 4 cases per 100,000 population.

text: A study by the Columbia Mailman School of Public Health found that gay men in Massachusetts visited health clinics significantly less often following the legalization of same-sex marriage in that state.[223]

text: Marriage statistics[edit]

text: There is no complete data on the number of same-sex marriages conducted in the United States. Some states and counties record the number of marriages, but the Federal Government does not. Nevertheless, in August 2016, the Treasury Department published a research paper, in which it had linked the tax returns of same-sex couples who had filed jointly in 2014 with their Social Security records. This way, it was able to determine the number of same-sex marriages in the United States. Additionally, the Treasury estimated that about 97.5% of all married couples file their taxes jointly. The statistics showed that in 2014 there was an estimated 183,280 married same-sex couples.

text:
[show]Extended content

Number of marriages in the United States in 2014 by state (and D.C.)

State
Marriages between women
Marriages between men
Same-sex marriages
Heterosexual marriages
 % same-sex marriages

Alabama
370
250
620
751,610
0.08%

Alaska
255
100
355
125,920
0.28%

Arizona
2,135
1,640
3,775
1,026,185
0.37%

Arkansas
350
210
560
483,495
0.12%

California
19,875
21,430
41,305
6,033,840
0.68%

Colorado
2,010
1,160
3,170
965,690
0.33%

Connecticut
1,915
1,245
3,160
614,990
0.51%

Delaware
625
475
1,100
153,345
0.71%

District of Columbia
500
1,485
1,985
52,425
3.65%

Florida
3,780
5,055
8,835
3,040,635
0.29%

Georgia
1,480
1,420
2,900
1,478,555
0.20%

Hawaii
555
590
1,140
244,795
0.46%

Idaho
385
160
545
317,765
0.17%

Illinois
3,505
3,205
6,705
2,146,900
0.31%

Indiana
1,690
975
2,660
1,174,570
0.23%

Iowa
1,140
560
1,700
601,220
0.28%

Kansas
495
250
750
545,525
0.14%

Kentucky
570
380
950
751,500
0.13%

Louisiana
385
270
655
643,435
0.10%

Maine
1,085
490
1,575
247,740
0.63%

Maryland
2,910
1,940
4,850
946,400
0.51%

Massachusetts
6,375
3,860
10,235
1,136,885
0.89%

Michigan
1,070
660
1,730
1,735,280
0.10%

Minnesota
2,450
1,550
4,000
1,043,940
0.38%

Mississippi
170
85
255
400,860
0.06%

Missouri
1,195
715
1,910
1,055,195
0.18%

Montana
190
55
245
195,915
0.13%

Nebraska
290
140
430
359,335
0.12%

Nevada
765
845
1,610
421,805
0.38%

New Hampshire
1,065
455
1,515
264,110
0.57%

New Jersey
2,865
2,330
5,195
1,532,115
0.34%

New Mexico
1,185
615
1,795
308,825
0.58%

New York
8,065
8,745
16,810
2,905,445
0.58%

North Carolina
2,715
1,575
4,290
1,624,160
0.26%

North Dakota
80
35
115
143,475
0.08%

Ohio
1,335
910
2,245
1,872,470
0.12%

Oklahoma
845
445
1,290
653,475
0.20%

Oregon
2,505
1,265
3,775
704,990
0.53%

Pennsylvania
3,440
2,505
5,945
2,270,380
0.26%

Rhode Island
565
385
950
167,590
0.56%

South Carolina
685
425
1,110
756,170
0.15%

South Dakota
90
40
130
165,950
0.08%

Tennessee
835
600
1,435
1,093,805
0.13%

Texas
4,285
3,755
8,040
4,291,525
0.19%

Utah
910
610
1,520
554,065
0.27%

Vermont
720
360
1,080
119,965
0.89%

Virginia
2,390
1,630
4,020
1,463,835
0.27%

Washington
5,675
3,960
9,635
1,310,855
0.73%

West Virginia
345
155
500
329,085
0.15%

Wisconsin
1,310
705
2,015
1,102,170
0.18%

Wyoming
105
60
160
114,115
0.14%

United States
100,535
82,765
183,280
52,444,330
0.35%

text: According to the statistics, female couples were four times more likely to have adopted children, than male couples. Additionally, male couples earned a pretax average of $176,000 per year, while lesbian couples earned $124,000 and straight couples earned $113,000. Most female same-sex marriages were celebrated in Oakland, Seattle, San Francisco, Springfield (MA) and Long Beach, compared to San Francisco, New York City, Washington D.C., Palm Springs and Seattle for gay male marriages.[224]

text: In June 2016, one year after the Supreme Court handed down its decision in Obergefell v. Hodges, Gallup reported that nearly 1 million U.S. adults were in same-sex marriages.[225]

text: Case law[edit]

text: United States case law regarding same-sex marriage:

text:
Anonymous v. Anonymous, 67 Misc.2d 982 (N.Y. 1971). The law makes no provision for a "marriage" between persons of the same sex.
Baker v. Nelson, 191 N.W.2d 185 (Minn. 1971). Upholds a Minnesota law defining marriage as the union of a man and a woman. (Overruled by Obergefell v. Hodges in 2015; see below)
Jones v. Hallahan, 501 S.W.2d 588 (Ky. 1973). Upholds the denial of a marriage license to two women in Kentucky based on dictionary definitions of marriage, despite the fact that state statutes do not specify the gender of marriage partners.[226]
Frances B. v. Mark B., 78 Misc.2d 112 (1974). Marriage is and always has been a contract between a man and a woman.
Singer v. Hara, 522 P.2d 1187 (Wash. Ct. App. 1974). The historical definition of marriage is between one man and one woman, and same-sex couples are inherently ineligible to marry. This ban does not constitute sex discrimination.

text:
Adams v. Howerton, 673 F.2d 1036 (9th Cir. 1982), cert. denied, 458 U.S. 1111. A same-sex marriage does not make one a "spouse" under the Immigration and Nationality Act.
De Santo v. Barnsley, 476 A.2d 952 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1984). Same-sex couples can not divorce because they cannot form a common law marriage.[227]

text:
In re Estate of Cooper, 149 Misc.2d 282 (Sur. Ct. Kings Co. 1990). The state has a compelling interest in fostering the traditional institution of marriage and prohibiting same-sex marriage.
Baehr v. Lewin, 852 P.2d 44 (Haw. 1993). A statute limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples violates the Hawaii constitution's equal-protection clause unless the state can show that the statute is both justified by compelling state interests and also narrowly tailored. This ruling prompted the adoption of Hawaii's constitutional amendment allowing the Legislature to restrict marriage to different-sex couples and the federal Defense of Marriage Act.
Dean v. District of Columbia, 653 A.2d 307 (D.C. 1995). DC does not authorise same-sex marriage; denial of a marriage license does not violate the Due Process Clause of the United States Constitution.
Storrs v. Holcomb, 645 N.Y.S.2d 286 (App. Div. 1996). New York does not recognize or authorize same-sex marriage. Overturned in part by Martinez v. County of Monroe in 2008.
In re Estate of Hall, 707 N.E.2d 201, 206 (Ill. App. Ct. 1998). Illinois does not recognize a same-sex marriage. The petitioner's claim to be in a same-sex marriage was not in a marriage recognized by law.
Baker v. Vermont, 170 Vt. 194; 744 A.2d 864 (Vt. 1999). The Common Benefits Clause of the state constitution requires that same-sex couples be granted the same legal rights as married persons, though it need not be called marriage.

text:
Frandsen v. County of Brevard, 828 So. 2d 757 (Fla. 2001). The Florida Constitution will not be construed to recognize same-sex marriage; sex classifications not subject to strict scrutiny under the Florida constitution.
Burns v. Burns, 560 S.E.2d 47 (Ga. Ct. App. 2002). Marriage is the union of one man and one woman.
In re Estate of Gardiner, 42 P.3d 120 (Kan. 2002). A post-operative male-to-female transsexual is not a woman within the meaning of the statutes and cannot validly marry another man.
Rosengarten v. Downes, 806 A.2d 1066 (Conn. Ct. App. 2002). Connecticut will not dissolve a Vermont civil union.
Standhardt v. Superior Court ex rel. County of Maricopa, 77 P.3d 451 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2003) The Constitution of Arizona does not provide the right to same-sex marriage.
Goodridge v. Dept. of Public Health, 798 N.E.2d 941 (Mass. 2003). The denial of marriage licenses to same-sex couples violated provisions of the Massachusetts State Constitution guaranteeing individual liberty and equality, and it was not rationally related to a legitimate state interest.
Morrison v. Sadler, 821 N.E.2d 15 (Ind. Super. Ct. 2005). Indiana's Defense of Marriage Act is valid.
Langan v. St. Vincent's Hospital, 802 N.Y.S.2d 476 (App. Div. 2005). For the purposes of New York's wrongful death statute, the survivor partner from a Vermont civil union lacks standing as a "spouse".
Citizens for Equal Protection v. Bruning, 455 F.3d 859 (8th Cir. 2006). Nebraska's Initiative Measure 416 does not violate Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause, was not a bill of attainder, and does not violate the First Amendment.[228]
Lewis v. Harris, 908 A.2d 196 (N.J. 2006). Prohibiting same-sex marriage does not violate the New Jersey Constitution, but the state must extend all the rights and responsibilities of marriage to same-sex couples. The Legislature had 180 days to amend the marriage laws or create a "parallel structure".
Andersen v. King County, 138 P.3d 963 (Wash. 2006). Washington's Defense of Marriage Act does not violate the State Constitution.
Hernandez v. Robles, 855 N.E.2d 1 (N.Y. 2006). The New York State Constitution does not require that marriage rights be extended to same-sex couples.[229]
Conaway v. Deane, 932 A.2d 571 (Md. 2007). Upholds a Maryland law defining marriage as the union of a man and a woman.
Martinez v. County of Monroe, 850 N.Y.S.2d 740 (App. Div. 2008). Because New York recognizes the marriages of opposite-sex couples from other jurisdictions, it must do the same for same-sex couples.[230]
In re Marriage Cases, 183 P.3d 384 (Cal. 2008). Limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples is invalid under the equal protection clause of the California Constitution. Full marriage rights, not merely domestic partnership, must be offered to same-sex couples.[231]
Kerrigan v. Commissioner of Public Health 957 A.2d 407 (Conn. 2008). The availability of civil unions but not marriage to same-sex partners is a violation of the equality and liberty provisions of the Connecticut Constitution.
Strauss v. Horton, 207 P.3d 48 (Cal. 2009). Proposition 8 was validly adopted, and marriages contracted before its adoption remain valid.[232]
Varnum v. Brien, 763 N.W.2d 862 (Iowa 2009). Barring same-sex couples from marriage violates the equal protection provisions of the Iowa Constitution. Equal protection requires full marriage, rather than civil unions or some other substitute, for same-sex couples.

text:
Gill v. Office of Personnel Management (2009–2013). Section 3 of the federal Defense of Marriage Act is found unconstitutional in U.S. district court. The First Circuit Court of Appeals affirms that ruling and stays implementation pending appeal. Windsor finds Section 3 unconstitutional and appeal of Gill is denied by the Supreme Court.
Massachusetts v. United States Department of Health and Human Services (2009–2013). Decided alongside Gill with the same outcome.
Golinski v. Office of Personnel Management (2010–2013). Section 3 of the federal Defense of Marriage Act is found unconstitutional in U.S. district court, which determines that sexual orientation is a quasi-suspect classification requiring the court to apply intermediate scrutiny, that is, to determine whether Section 3 relates to an important government interest. On appeal the case is held in abeyance pending the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in Windsor, which settles the issues raised in Golinski, the appeal of which to the Supreme Court is then denied.
United States v. Windsor (2010–2013). Section 3 of the federal Defense of Marriage Act is found unconstitutional in U.S. district court. The Second Circuit Court of Appeals affirms that ruling, as does the U.S. Supreme Court. The U.S. Government began implementing the decision the same week.[233]

text: Hollingsworth v. Perry (2009–2013). California's Proposition 8, a voter-endorsed constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage, is found unconstitutional in U.S. district court in Perry v. Schwarzenegger. The proposition's backers appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which upholds the district court's finding of unconstitutionality in Perry v. Brown. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the proposition's backers lacked standing to appeal and left the district court ruling intact.[234]

text:
Christiansen v. Christiansen. On June 6, 2011, the Supreme Court of Wyoming grants a divorce to two women who married in Canada, but says its decision does not apply "in any context other than divorce".[235]
Port v. Cowan (2010–2012). Maryland must recognize valid out-of-state same-sex marriages under doctrine of comity.[236]
Garden State Equality v. Dow (2011–2013), New Jersey's civil unions violate due process guarantees; denying same-sex marriage ruled unconstitutional in state superior court. The N.J. Supreme Court refuses to stay the ruling and the state defendants drop their appeal.
Griego v. Oliver, 316 P.3d 865 (N.M. 2013). The New Mexico Supreme Court rules that the State Constitution requires marriage rights to be extended to same-sex couples.
Kitchen v. Herbert (Utah). U.S. district court, 961 F. Supp. 2d 1181 (2013), rules the state's ban on same-sex marriage is unconstitutional. The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals upholds that ruling upheld on June 25, 2014. All parties support review by the U.S. Supreme Court, and that court denied review on October 6.[237]
Whitewood v. Wolf (Pennsylvania). On May 20, 2014, Judge John E. Jones III rules that Pennsylvania's same-sex marriage ban is unconstitutional.[238]
Geiger v. Kitzhaber and Rummell v. Kitzhaber (Oregon). On May 19, 2014, District Judge Michael J. McShane declares Oregon's same-sex marriage ban unconstitutional.[239]
Bostic v. Schaefer (Virginia). The Fourth Circuit on July 28, 2014, in a 2–1 decision, affirms a district court ruling that Virginia's denial of marriage rights to same-sex couples is unconstitutional.[240] The Supreme Court denied review on October 6.[237]
Baskin v. Bogan (Indiana) and Wolf v. Walker (Wisconsin). The Seventh Circuit consolidated these cases and on September 4, 2014, upheld two district court rulings that had found Indiana's and Wisconsin's bans on same-sex marriage unconstitutional.[241] The U.S. Supreme Court denied review on October 6.[237]
Bishop v. Smith (Oklahoma). On July 18, 2014, the Tenth Circuit upholds the district court ruling that Oklahoma's ban on same-sex marriage is unconstitutional.[242] The Supreme Court denied review on October 6.[237]
Barrier v. Vasterling (Missouri). State Circuit Judge J. Dale Youngs rules on October 3, 2014, that Missouri's refusal to recognize same-sex marriages from other jurisdictions violates the plaintiff same-sex couples' right to equal protection under both the state and federal constitutions.[243]
Caspar v. Snyder (Michigan). On January 15, 2015, U.S. District Judge Mark A. Goldsmith ruled that the state must recognize the validity of "window marriages" established on March 21 and 22, 2014, before the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals stayed a district court ruling in DeBoer v. Snyder that found Michigan's ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional, despite the fact that DeBoer was later reversed.[244] The state chose not to appeal.[245]
Obergefell v. Hodges (2013-2015) U.S. Supreme Court case finding state bans on same-sex marriage to be unconstitutional under the 14th Amendment. (Overturned Baker v. Nelson)