"Could the future be such that I will lose the legal right to refer to myself as John's widower?"
That's what Jim Obergefell, the plaintiff in Obergefell v. Hodges, the Supreme Court case legalizing same-sex marriage, thought to himself when the court last week struck down another landmark ruling that recognized a constitutional right to abortion.
Obergefell won his case in 2015 after suing Ohio for not being able to be listed as his husband's surviving spouse on his death certificate due to the state's ban on same-sex marriage. NotedDC talked to Obergefell about what he thinks the ruling overturning Roe v. Wade could mean for other rights recognized by the court:
——
In Clarence Thomas' opinion, he wrote that "in future cases, we should reconsider all of this Court's substantive due process precedents," explicitly naming Obergefell v. Hodges. You predicted this when Politico published the leaked draft of the majority opinion in May, but what was your reaction when this opinion came out?
I got past the anger at what the Supreme Court has done by taking away a right it had previously affirmed and by this gross intrusion into privacy and to the rights of a pregnant person, of a woman, to make decisions about their own body. Then I found snippets of this concurring decision from Thomas and it angered and infuriated me.
Here is a justice on the highest Court in the land, putting targets on rights that we have enjoyed and rights that we have come to rely on. And a woman should have the right to birth control. A woman or a pregnant person deserves the right to make decisions that impact their own body without this gross government intrusion into their privacy.
I find it appalling that a Supreme Court justice, whose own marriage would have been illegal in many states across this country until 1967, I find it unconscionable that he would continue to attack the relationships, the marriages, the families of hundreds of thousands of people across this country.
What do you think it says about his intent of targeting same-sex relationships in his opinion?
The fact that he is specifically calling out to opinions that are central to the queer community tells me that he is not a justice who can apply law, interpret law, and make decisions, free from animus against someone who is different from him. I believe this is purely driven by his personal dislike for the LGBTQ+ community.
You're running for the Ohio house of representatives in a district that is held by a Republican. How do you think this ruling will mobilize voters?
My hope is that it does mobilize people because I look at this decision as the proof of what we have tried to get across to people back in the 2016 presidential elections. I talked about this. Lots of other people talked about this, about the importance of voting and voting for the candidate that most closely matches your values, to make sure that the Supreme Court would be composed of justices who actually reflect our nation the way we look and the values we hold.
Polls show that a majority of Americans support marriage equality. Polls shows that a majority of Americans support a woman's right to an abortion. But we have an extreme right-wing court because people didn't vote and that allowed an extreme minority to take the White House and to create the Supreme Court that doesn't reflect us. So my hope is that it is a wake-up moment for a lot of people to realize, "I have got to be involved. I've got to be aware of what's happening and I've got to vote in every single election."
How should Democrats be balancing their attention on state vs. national races now, given the ruling?
At the state level, we have an opportunity to pass legislation to protect the rights that we believe in, and that poll shows what we as Americans believe in. So at the state level, we can do that. But it's also by voting at the state level, you are putting into office a governor, a legislature, people who share your values.
We also have to push in my opinion, we have to push our members of Congress to also do the right thing. And don't just say you believe in human and civil rights, take action, even if you're not sure it's going anywhere. We look to Congress to actually propose bills and to attempt and hopefully succeed, but at least attempt to pass federal legislation that protects these rights. Because these rights are fundamental to who we are as human beings.
Do you think Democrats in leadership positions, like President Biden and Majority Leader Charles Schumer, are meeting the moment? And what more do you think can be done?
I look to leadership in the Democratic Party to live our values and to live our values by being clear and strong and insistent that these are the values America is supposed to represent. These are the values we as a party or we as individuals, we as people believe in and will fight for. I want to see them making those statements and showing us that they are fighting for those things.
And what does that look like? That's a great question. Honestly, I don't know exactly what that looks like. We need to see them. They need to be clear and insistent, and consistent that these are the values that this country is supposed to represent and these are the values that they believe in and will fight for. I want to see that. I want to see that from all levels of government.
No comments:
Post a Comment