SUPREME COURT PLAZA, Washington, DC – Minutes after the completion of oral arguments in the marriage cases at the U.S. Supreme Court today, Constitutional Accountability Center attorneys who were in the Court for today’s proceedings issued the following reaction:

CAC Vice President Judith E. Schaeffer said, “Ultimately, today during oral argument, the opponents of marriage equality proved unable to answer or provide any good reason why the loving couples before the Court should not enjoy the dignity of marriage.”

CAC Civil Rights Director David Gans continued, “Even the states’ attorney went so far as to say that marriage doesn’t confer dignity, to which Justice Kennedy expressed his firm disagreement.”

CAC Chief Counsel Elizabeth Wydra said, “While some of the justices expressed hesitation about having a court instead of voters vindicate these constitutional guarantees, that’s exactly why we have these provisions: So we don’t have to ask our neighbors for permission. As Solicitor General Verrilli said, ‘Gay and lesbian people are laying claim to the promise of the Fourteenth Amendment. Now.’”

#

Resources:

CAC’s “friend of the court” brief in Obergefell v. Hodges: http://theusconstitution.org/sites/default/files/briefs/CAC_Amicus-Obergefell_v_Hodges.pdf

“Why the Constitution Trumps Any State’s Ban on Same-Sex Marriage,” The New Republic, April 23, 2015: http://www.newrepublic.com/article/121623/constitution-not-voters-should-have-final-say-gay-marriage

“When Deciding Gay Marriage, SCOTUS Should Listen to John Roberts’ Confirmation Hearing,” Slate, March 26, 2015: http://www.slate.com/blogs/outward/2015/03/26/gay_marriage_scotus_should_listen_to_john_roberts_confirmation_hearings.html

Roberts at 10: “John Roberts and LGBT Rights  –​ The Jury is Still Out,” April 2015: http://theusconstitution.org/sites/default/files/briefs/Roberts_at_10-LGBT.pdf

##
 
Constitutional Accountability Center (www.theusconstitution.org) is a think tank, public interest law firm, and action center dedicated to fulfilling the progressive promise of the Constitution’s text and history.

###