US Supreme Court split on gay marriages

Washington: The US Supreme Court appeared divided on Tuesday on whether same-sex couples have a constitutional right to wed, as it weighs a potentially historic decision that could see gay marriage legalised nationwide.

 

Hundreds of activists from both sides of the debate rallied in front of the court in the nation’s capital as the nine justices inside heard a case on one of the most polarising social issues facing the country. The court appeared to be split along its usual ideological divide, with its four liberal members seeming to favour what Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg called a “change in the institution of marriage”.

 

But the conservatives, led by Chief Justice John Roberts, expressed concern during the 2.5-hour hearing about a stark transformation of an age-old tradition. “You’re seeking to change what the institution is,” Roberts said, warning counsel for the plaintiffs: “If you prevail, there will be no debate, closing the case is closing the debate.”

 

Justice Anthony Kennedy —  seen as the likely swing vote in the case and the author of past opinions that expanded gay rights — seemed to give credence to both sides of the debate.

 

He stressed it would be difficult to change the traditional notion of marriage as a union between a man and woman. But he also noted that “same-sex marriage can’t have a more noble purpose... ‘We can’t procreate but... we too have a dignity that we want to fulfil’.”

 

Experts say recognition of same-sex marriage — legal in 37 of the country’s 50 states and in the capital Washington, but not recognized everywhere — seems inevitable. The court heard from plaintiffs from four states — Ohio, Michigan, Tennessee and Kentucky — where gay marriage is still barred.

 

Supported by the administration of President Barack Obama, the 16 plaintiffs want their marriages to be recognised as constitutionally protected in all US states. Their home states currently define marriage as being between a man and a woman, and do not recognise gay marriages carried out elsewhere in the country.

 

If the Supreme Court were to rule in favour of the plaintiffs, it would thus make a de facto decision against all 13 states banning gay marriage. Supporting the plaintiffs, Solicitor General Donald Verrilli, a top Obama administration attorney, argued for same-sex marriage bans to be struck down. “In a world where gay and lesbians live openly as our neighbours, it’s simply untenable that they should be denied, or that they should wait,” he said. “They deserve the equal protection of the la...”