Liberal

Potter: Supreme Court should rule that states cannot ban gay marriage

In the past two weeks the courts have taken major steps toward marriage equality. The Supreme Court of the United States refused to involve itself in the gay marriage debate which effectively allowed the lower court rulings in 11 states allowing gay marriage to stand. Including those 11 states, 30 states now allow same-sex marriage.

According to an Oct. 6 Texas Tribune article, U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), who openly identifies as a member of the Tea Party, stated that he will be proposing a constitutional amendment that prevents the federal government from striking down state marriage laws.

Cruz’s proposed amendment shows that the Constitution as is allows for gay marriage. Cruz’s opposition to gay marriage is one of the major flaws that will eventually force the Tea Party to change its ideology, or be forced out of politics.  It’s time for the Supreme Court to resolve this futile argument that extremist groups perpetuate. It’s time for the Supreme Court to rule that states cannot ban gay marriage.

At this point it seems that a consensus of the courts, and technically even politicians like Cruz, are saying that marriage equality is indeed in line with the Constitution. National marriage equality has several constitutional grounds, most prominently the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment.

Unlike other issues the Tea Party has adopted, the right to marriage equality is by far the most firmly rooted in the Constitution.



Politicians like Cruz are grasping at threads and desperately trying to do what they can to change the seemingly inevitable end of the gay marriage movement, which would be complete national marriage equality. These stragglers do not mean that the movement is slowing. Similar to the Civil Rights movement, those against basic human rights will gradually get swept up into cultural and social change.

If the current trajectory continues, those who oppose gay marriage will eventually be highly looked down upon and will have little chance at succeeding in public office.

Cruz, and other advocates for “traditional marriage” hurt the Republican Party’s reputation, and will be perceived as increasingly negative as the support for marriage equality rises. This is good news for the Democrats, as siding with the Constitution and with the courts on an emotional and heated issue such as gay marriage projects a positive image. However, as long the debate over marriage equality persists, the parties will continue to be divided, which will contribute to a less productive Congress.

The Supreme Court’s current strategy of not addressing the issue is slowing the process of complete marriage equality and contributing to partisanship. In the past the Supreme Court has made decisions that have drastically changed the face of human rights movements, such as Brown v. Board of Education, which ruled that separate is not equal. Decisions like these have in the past, and will continue to, revolutionize our nation and create greater equality, which traditional American values undoubtedly strives for.

It is long past time that a final decision is made. A Supreme Court ruling that states cannot ban gay marriage could reduce meaningless partisanship and would be a huge victory for human rights.

Rachel Potter is a senior political science and sociology major. Her column appears weekly. She can be reached at [email protected].





Top Stories