Supreme Court sides with same-sex couples in Arkansas suit

Poll: 62 percent of Americans support same-sex marriage

Support for gay marriage surges, even among groups once wary

"Having made that choice, Arkansas may not, consistent with Obergefell, deny married same-sex couples that recognition", the court said.

Another Arkansas couple in the case was Leigh and Jana Jacobs who had a similar experience the when Leigh Jacobs gave birth to their son in 2015.

According to Slate, the court ruled that their previous decision on same-sex marriage, which says states must give marriage rights to same-sex couples "on the same terms and conditions as opposite-sex couples", also extends to child-rearing because the state would list a married couple of opposite sexes as a child's parents.

When their daughter was born in 2015, the Pavans completed an application for their child's birth certificate and listed both spouses as parents.

To read this article in one of Houston's most-spoken languages, click on the button below. "The statute in question establishes a set of rules created to ensure that the biological parents of a child are listed on the child's birth certificate". Gorsuch criticized the majority's decision striking down Arkansas's practice, relying on a narrow interpretation of the Supreme Court's landmark marriage equality decision in Obergefell v. Hodges.

In a statement sent to 40/29 News, Danielle Weatherby of the group, For Fayetteville, praised the Supreme Court's decision.

She added that she "will continue to review today's decision to determine the appropriate next steps upon remand to the Arkansas Supreme Court to ensure that the law is followed properly".

We can not know for sure whether Gorsuch voted to take up this case - but it is notable that the Court decided not to consider this issue when Justice Antonin Scalia was still alive. His dissent was joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr. The short dissenting opinion does some hand-waving around how men who are not biological fathers are routinely named on babies' birth certificates, but doesn't address the point since it really is proof that the state does not have a "biology based registration regime".

The lead plaintiffs in this case, Terrah and Marissa Pavan, DID get a proper birth certificate for their child thanks to a circuit court order, but Attorney General Leslie Rutledge appealed and shut it down for other couples soon after. It overturns the Arkansas Supreme Court's December ruling that "it does not violate equal protection to acknowledge basic biological truths".

Latest News