People often talk about settled law like it’s a mountain that can't be moved. But if the last few years in the American judicial system have taught us anything, it’s that even the most solid-looking peaks can erode or be leveled entirely. Since the 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges decision, which legalized it nationwide, the conversation around overturning same sex marriage has shifted from a fringe legal theory to a central point of political and judicial debate. It’s heavy stuff. Honestly, many people thought the debate ended a decade ago, but the legal architecture of the United States is more fluid than we like to admit.
Is it actually going to happen? That’s the big question.
To understand the current risk, you've got to look at the crumb trail left by the Supreme Court itself. When Roe v. Wade was overturned in 2022 via the Dobbs decision, it sent a shockwave through every law office in the country. It wasn't just about abortion. It was about the "Right to Privacy" and the concept of "Substantive Due Process." Justice Clarence Thomas didn't mince words in his concurring opinion. He explicitly wrote that the court should reconsider other precedents, specifically mentioning Obergefell. That one sentence turned a quiet concern into a loud, frantic alarm for millions of families.
The Clarence Thomas Roadmap and the Dobbs Effect
The legal logic is kind of technical, but it boils down to how the Constitution is read. Most of the rights we take for granted today—like using contraception or marrying who you love—aren't explicitly written in the 1787 text. They were "found" by previous courts in the 14th Amendment. When the Dobbs majority decided that abortion wasn't "deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition," they created a new yardstick. Critics of the current court argue that if you apply that same narrow "history and tradition" test to overturning same sex marriage, the legal standing of those unions starts to look a lot more fragile.
It's a scary thought for many.
Justice Samuel Alito, who wrote the majority opinion in Dobbs, tried to pinky-promise that the ruling was only about abortion. He said it shouldn't be understood to cast doubt on other precedents. But law doesn't always work on pinky-promises. Lawyers are already using the Dobbs framework to challenge various state-level protections. If the fundamental reasoning that supported Obergefell is deemed "demonstrably erroneous" by a future majority, the dominoes could start falling faster than people expect.
✨ Don't miss: Ukraine War Map May 2025: Why the Frontlines Aren't Moving Like You Think
We aren't just talking about hypothetical theories here. There are real cases moving through lower courts right now regarding religious liberty and the right of businesses to refuse service to LGBTQ+ couples. These are often seen as the "soft" opening to a broader push for overturning same sex marriage. They chip away at the edges. They create a legal environment where marriage is legal on paper, but practically difficult to navigate in the real world.
Why the Respect for Marriage Act Isn't a Total Shield
You might remember the big headlines in late 2022 when President Biden signed the Respect for Marriage Act (RFMA). There was a lot of celebrating. It felt like a "we fixed it" moment. But if we're being honest, the RFMA is a bit of a safety net, not a concrete floor. It was a reactive piece of legislation designed specifically because the threat of the Supreme Court overturning same sex marriage became a tangible reality.
Here is what the RFMA actually does:
If Obergefell is ever struck down, the RFMA requires the federal government and other states to recognize a marriage that was valid in the state where it was performed. It basically protects the "portability" of your marriage.
However, it does not force a state to issue new marriage licenses to same-sex couples if the Supreme Court tosses the 2015 ruling.
So, picture this. If you live in a state with a "trigger law" or an old constitutional ban that is currently dormant, that ban could snap back into place. You’d be married in the eyes of the IRS, but you might not be able to get a new marriage license at your local courthouse. It creates a "checkerboard" United States. Some states would be havens; others would be legal deserts for LGBTQ+ rights. This isn't just about a piece of paper. It affects hospital visitation, inheritance, tax filings, and adoption rights. The complexity is staggering.
🔗 Read more: Percentage of Women That Voted for Trump: What Really Happened
The Role of State Constitutions and Local Battles
While everyone stares at Washington D.C., the real action is happening in places like Michigan, Nevada, and Maryland. These states have been busy. They are moving to bake marriage equality into their own state constitutions. Why? Because a state constitution can often provide more protection than the federal one. If the federal hammer falls, these state-level protections act as a shield.
But not every state is doing this. In fact, many states still have "Defense of Marriage" language sitting in their books, just waiting for the federal mandate to disappear.
Think about the logistical nightmare. A couple moves from New York to Tennessee for a job. Under a scenario where overturning same sex marriage has occurred, their legal status could shift the moment they cross state lines. We saw this pre-2015. It was a mess of conflicting court orders and "zombie laws." The push to return to that era is driven by a specific judicial philosophy called Originalism. Proponents believe that if a right isn't explicitly mentioned in the Constitution or historically recognized in the 1860s, it shouldn't be a "fundamental right" today.
It’s a rigid way of looking at the world. It ignores how much society has evolved. Yet, it is the dominant philosophy of the current Supreme Court majority.
Misconceptions About "Settled Law"
There’s this idea that once the public accepts something, the courts won't touch it. Polls consistently show that a significant majority of Americans—including many Republicans—support same-sex marriage. You'd think that would be a deterrent.
💡 You might also like: What Category Was Harvey? The Surprising Truth Behind the Number
But the Supreme Court isn't a polling station.
The justices are appointed for life specifically so they don't have to care about what’s popular. They care about the law as they interpret it. History is full of examples where the Court took an unpopular stance that changed the fabric of the country. Just look at the backlash to Brown v. Board of Education or, conversely, the praise for Plessy v. Ferguson in its time. The court operates in a vacuum of its own making.
Another misconception is that overturning same sex marriage would automatically "unmarry" everyone. Legal experts generally agree that the "reliance interest" is too high for that. Basically, people have built lives, bought homes, and raised kids based on these marriages. Courts hate unraveling existing contracts. But—and this is a big "but"—the ability for new couples to marry would be the first thing to go. And for those already married, their rights could be slowly stripped away through administrative changes or "conscience clauses" that allow officials to ignore their legal status.
Practical Steps and the Path Forward
What do you actually do with this information? It’s easy to feel paralyzed by the "what ifs." But legal experts and advocacy groups like Lambda Legal and the ACLU emphasize that being proactive is better than being reactive. The legal landscape is shifting, and while we aren't at the point of a total reversal yet, the gears are turning.
If you are concerned about the future of your legal protections, here is the ground-level reality of what needs to happen:
- Update your paperwork. Don't rely solely on a marriage certificate. Ensure you have independent legal documents like a Durable Power of Attorney, a Healthcare Proxy, and a detailed Will. These documents function as a backup. If a state official tries to challenge your marriage status in an emergency, these private contracts are much harder to overturn.
- Focus on state-level elections. The battle for marriage equality is returning to the states. The governors, attorneys general, and state legislators you vote for will be the ones deciding whether to keep marriage legal if Obergefell falls.
- Understand your employer’s policies. Many large corporations provide benefits regardless of state law. Check if your health insurance and pension plans are tied to the legal definition of marriage or if they have internal "domestic partner" or "inclusive spouse" language that would survive a Supreme Court ruling.
- Stay informed on "Religious Freedom" bills. Often, the path to overturning same sex marriage isn't a frontal assault. It’s a series of smaller laws that allow individuals or organizations to opt-out of recognizing marriages based on "sincere religious beliefs." These are the cases to watch in the news.
The reality is that the legal victory of 2015 was a beginning, not an end. The U.S. legal system is an ongoing argument. Right now, the argument is leaning toward a more restrictive interpretation of rights. Staying vigilant isn't about being cynical; it's about being prepared. The law is only as strong as the people willing to defend it in the courts, in the legislatures, and at the ballot box.
Whether the court moves toward overturning same sex marriage or decides to leave it alone will likely depend on the cases that bubble up from the lower circuits over the next three to five years. We are in a "wait and see" period, but the preparations for a different legal reality have already begun. Take the time to secure your individual legal standing now so that your family is protected no matter which way the judicial wind blows. Information is your best defense. Keep your documents in order and your eyes on the dockets.