Tanco v. Haslam
Headline: Court agrees to decide whether the Fourteenth Amendment requires states to allow and recognize same-sex marriages, grants review limited to two questions, and sets briefing and argument schedules affecting couples and states.
Holding: The Court consolidated the cases and granted review limited to two questions about whether the Fourteenth Amendment requires states to license same-sex marriages and to recognize out-of-state same-sex marriages, setting briefing and argument schedules.
- Court will decide whether states must license same-sex marriages.
- Court will decide whether states must recognize out-of-state same-sex marriages.
- Sets schedules and time limits for briefs and oral arguments.
Summary
Background
The Court consolidated cases and granted review focused on two specific questions about same-sex marriage. The disputes involve whether the Fourteenth Amendment requires a state to license a marriage between two people of the same sex and whether a state must recognize a same-sex marriage lawfully performed and licensed in another state. The order sets who may file briefs and when those briefs are due.
Reasoning
The Court limited its review to those two questions and allocated time for oral argument: ninety minutes for the first question and one hour for the second. The order also restricts parties to briefing and arguing only the questions they put forward in their petitions. The Court set firm deadlines: petitioners’ briefs due February 27, 2015; respondents’ briefs due March 27, 2015; and reply briefs due April 17, 2015, all by 2 p.m.
Real world impact
This order does not resolve the constitutional questions on the merits but announces that the Court will decide them. The upcoming arguments and eventual decision will directly affect same-sex couples and state officials by clarifying whether states must license and recognize same-sex marriages. Because this is a grant of review and not a final ruling on the merits, the legal outcome and practical effects will depend on the Court’s later written decision.
Ask about this case
Ask questions about the entire case, including all opinions (majority, concurrences, dissents).
What was the Court's main decision and reasoning?
How did the dissenting opinions differ from the majority?
What are the practical implications of this ruling?