Supreme Court on right side of history
- Court's argument focused on individual liberty%2C safeguarding families%2C equal protection.
- Justices addresses fears about losing religious liberty by affirming First Amendment.
Prior to the start of oral arguments at the U.S. Supreme Court, The Tennessean Editorial Board opined that Tennessee's embrace of liberty should extend to same-sex marriage.
Citing the Tennessee Constitution's assertion that "all power is inherent in the people" (Article I, Section 1) and its strong affirmation of freedom to worship or not (Article I, Section 3), the main argument of that editorial was this: "In the vein of respecting a longstanding tradition of civil liberties, respect for but independence from religion, and freedom inherent in this state, it is in the interest of our state to allow our gay and lesbian citizens to get married."
Before Friday's high court ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges, 37 states allowed same-sex marriage. Tennessee was not among them.
In the 5-4 decision, Supreme Court justices came out on the right side of history on Friday.
The court majority opined that the 14th amendment required states to grant same-sex couples the right to marry and required them to recognize same-sex marriages in other states.
The court's argument focused on individual liberty, safeguarding families and equal protection.
Shortly afterward, the first gay couples in Middle Tennessee began getting married.
Tennessee Attorney General Herbert Slatery held a press conference explaining how that decision would affect the state. While all counties would have to issue marriage licenses, clerks may continue to use discretion on whether to officiate.
There was backlash to the ruling from national and state politicians opposed to same-sex marriage. In addition, Rep. Bryan Terry, R-Murfreesboro, and Rep. Andy Holt, R-Dresden, are proposing a "Tennessee Pastor Protection Act," out of fear, perhaps, that religious authorities who oppose same-sex marriage would be punished for not performing a wedding.
However, the Supreme Court addressed that in its opinion, citing the First Amendment: "... it must be emphasized that religions, and those who adhere to religious doctrines, may continue to advocate with utmost, sincere conviction that, by divine precepts, same-sex marriage should not be condoned."
Opinion Engagement Editor David Plazas wrote this editorial on behalf of The Tennessean Editorial Board. Call him at (615) 259-8063, email him firstname.lastname@example.org or tweet to him at @davidplazas.