A Silent but Decisive Refusal

The U.S. Supreme Court declined on Monday to hear an appeal that could have reopened debate on the legality of same-sex marriage. By rejecting the case without providing a written explanation, the Court effectively reaffirmed the landmark 2015 decision, Obergefell v. Hodges, which established marriage equality at the federal level. This move marks the end of legal efforts by Kim Davis, a former Kentucky county clerk and long-standing symbol of the religious conservative pushback, who aimed to challenge the ruling on the grounds of her Christian faith.

Kim Davis: From Religious Resistance to Legal Defeat

In 2015, Republican official Kim Davis gained national attention after refusing to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, citing her religious beliefs as justification. Her stance turned her into a hero for segments of the Christian right, placing her at the center of various legal battles. Davis was ultimately ordered to pay $360,000 in damages to a couple who sued her for discrimination. Seeking to overturn this ruling and challenge the constitutionality of same-sex marriage, she appealed to the Supreme Court under the banner of religious freedom — an appeal that has now been quietly denied.

A Decision That Avoids a New Political Firestorm

By declining to take up the case, the Supreme Court avoids reigniting a politically fraught national debate in an already volatile climate concerning civil liberties. In 2022, the same conservative-leaning Court overturned Roe v. Wade, eliminating federal protections for abortion and sparking fears that other rights, including same-sex marriage, could be next in line. Many in the LGBTQ+ community had been bracing for a similar rollback.

Relief Among LGBTQ+ Advocates

Although the Court did not issue a statement explaining its decision, the move was widely interpreted as a strong — if silent — affirmation of established precedent by equality advocates.

“Today, love wins again,” said Kelley Robinson, president of the Human Rights Campaign, celebrating what she called “a reminder that elected officials cannot strip others of their constitutional rights.”
Mary Bonauto, the attorney who argued Obergefell before the Court, described the moment as “a collective sigh of relief” for millions of LGBTQ+ families.

Allen Morris of the National LGBTQ Task Force added, “Marriage equality is the law of the land — period. Our opponents have lost again: hate is burning out; love endures.”

A Deeply Rooted Social Reality with Looming Threats

Since marriage equality became federal law, over 800,000 same-sex couples have married in the U.S., raising nearly 300,000 children. These families are now entrenched within the American social fabric, embodying what legal scholars refer to as “reliance interests” — rights that people depend upon to build their lives, and which, if revoked, could cause widespread disruption.

Continued Vigilance Needed as Local Laws Shift

Despite this positive development at the federal level, LGBTQ+ advocates cautioned against complacency. Kevin Jennings, CEO of Lambda Legal, emphasized the urgent need to stay alert:

“Opponents of equality remain powerful and well-funded. This is no time to lower our guard.”
Indeed, lawmakers in several conservative states are actively pursuing legislation that undermines marriage equality. In Texas, for example, judges can now cite religious objections to decline officiating same-sex marriages.

At the same time, the 2022 passage of the Respect for Marriage Act, signed by President Joe Biden, solidified federal and state recognition of same-sex and interracial marriages. This law ensures existing unions remain valid, even if Obergefell were ever overturned. However, some states could still refuse to issue new licenses, leading to unequal protections based on geography.

A Conservative Majority Cautious of Public Consensus

By opting not to hear Davis’s case, the Supreme Court appears to signal a quiet acknowledgment that same-sex marriage has become constitutionally entrenched. While this provides temporary relief to the LGBTQ+ community, it does not mark the end of possible challenges.

The Court has shifted significantly since Obergefell, with three conservative justices appointed by Donald Trump. The original dissenters — Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and John Roberts — are still on the bench. In fact, in 2022, Thomas publicly expressed support for revisiting the 2015 ruling.

Nevertheless, conservative justices like Amy Coney Barrett have recently drawn distinctions between deeply rooted rights — such as those involving familial life — and polarizing issues like abortion. This nuance suggests that even a right-leaning Court may be reluctant to challenge a decision that now enjoys the backing of more than 70% of Americans, according to recent polls.