Texas sen. Ted Cruz has argued that the High Council had never legalized same-sex marriage, calling the decision “clearly wrong.”
On his show, Verdict with Ted Cruz, the Texas senator discussed the “vulnerability” of Obergefell’s decision against Hodges following the landmark Supreme Court decision to overturn his landmark ruling granting abortion rights nationwide.
In Obergefell v Hodges, the Supreme Court ruled in 2015 that the right to marry is guaranteed by the Due Process Clause and the Equal Process Clause of the 14th Amendment — giving gay couples the right to marry in the United States.
“Obergefell, like Roe v Wade, ignored two centuries of our nation’s history,” Cruz said Saturday when conservative commentator Liz Wheeler asked him what the arguments would be to overthrow Obergefell.
“Marriage was always an issue left to the states,” he continued. “We saw states before Obergefell – some states moved to allow same-sex marriage, other states moved to allow civil partnerships. There were different standards that the states used.’
He went on to argue that if the Supreme Court had not ruled as it did, “the democratic process would have continued to work.”
Texas Sen. Ted Cruz argued Saturday that Supreme Court decision to allow same-sex marriage was ‘clearly wrong’
He told conservative commentator Liz Wheeler that the decision should have been left to the states
But, he said in Obergefell, ‘the Court said, ‘No, we know better than you, and now every state must approve and allow same-sex marriage.
“That decision was clearly wrong when it was made,” Cruz said, adding that the court was “overreaching.”
Still, he noted that the Supreme Court decision quashing the historic Roe v Wade case suggested that Obergefell be treated differently.
“In Dobbs, the Supreme Court said, ‘Roe is different because it’s the only one of the cases where a human life is taken, and it’s qualitatively different,’ he said. “I agree with that statement.”
In Obergefell v Hodges, the Supreme Court ruled in 2015 that the right to marry is guaranteed by the Constitution. People are seen outside the Supreme Court after the decision
His comments come just a month after the Supreme Court overturned its landmark decision guaranteeing women the right to abortion.
The Supreme Court ruled that Roe v Wade was wrongly ruled last month, effectively leaving it up to each individual state to determine whether to legalize abortion, with at least 18 states now banning it.
The ruling read: “Like the infamous decision in Plessy v. Ferguson, Roe was also hugely wrong and on a collision course with the Constitution from the day it was passed.
“Those on the losing side—those who wanted to advance the state’s interest in the life of the fetus—could no longer try to persuade their elected representatives to adopt policies consistent with their views.”
Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas called on his fellow judges to ‘reconsider’ and potentially overturn other cases over the jurisdiction of ‘substantial due process in the wake of the court’s decision to overturn Roe v Wade to bring’
“The Court short-circuited the democratic process by closing it to the vast number of Americans who disagreed with Roe,” the ruling said.
However, in his majority decision, Judge Samuel Alito wrote that “nothing in this opinion should be taken to cast doubt on precedents not related to abortion.”
But his colleague, Judge Clarence Thomas called on his fellow judges to “reconsider” and possibly quash other cases decided on the legal jurisdiction of “substantial due process.”
Substantive due process refers to the idea that people have fundamental rights that are not specifically enshrined in the Constitution – and was the basis for a number of groundbreaking cases, including Obergefell.
“In future cases, we must reconsider all substantive precedents of this Court, including Griswold, Lawrence and Obergefell,” Thomas wrote.
“Because any substantive decision on a fair trial is demonstrably wrong, we have a duty to correct the error identified in these precedents,” he continued.
Thomas specifically referred to the 1965 Griswold v Connecticut decision, which gives married couples access to birth control; and the 2003 Lawrence v Texas decision, which prohibits states from banning consensual gay sex.
That decision eventually led to the 2015 Obergefell v Hodges decision, which established a constitutional right to same-sex marriage.
A woman cries outside Supreme Court after court rules ‘Constitution does not grant right to abortion’
Tensions over the future of abortion rights in the country have been running high since a draft Dobbs opinion was leaked — showing the Supreme Court’s conservative majority was ready to push back the question of whether abortion was legal
But this isn’t the first time Cruz has spoken out against Obergefell’s decision.
After the decision was first handed down in June 2015, he told NPR in an interview that states not involved in the lawsuit should ignore the decision.
“Those who are not parties to the lawsuit are not bound by it,” he said at the time.
Cruz also said in that interview that he would make the opposition to same-sex marriage a central part of his 2016 presidential election campaign — which he ultimately lost to future President Donald Trump.