Transcript and Audio of Supreme Court same-sex marriage case

Below are the audio and transcripts of oral arguments made in the same-sex marriage case heard by the Supreme Court today (Obergefell v. Hodges). Justices heard each side present arguments in answer to two questions:

1. Does the 14th Amendment require states to issue marriage licenses to two people of the same sex?

2. Does the 14th Amendment require states to recognize same-sex marriages licensed in other states?

The Court will render a ruling on these questions by the end of June. In the meantime, you can listen to or read the arguments from both sides below.

Audio

Question 1 [download]

Question 2 [download]

.

Transcripts

Question 1 [download]

Question 2 [download]

12 Responses to Transcript and Audio of Supreme Court same-sex marriage case

  1. Bob Wilson April 28, 2015 at 12:31 pm #

    Sure? Not playing for me.

  2. James Bradshaw April 28, 2015 at 5:53 pm #

    I listened to the arguments on both sides. Unfortunately (for my side), I think we did not entirely succeed in addressing the Court’s concerns. Attorney John Bursch seemed to be the best prepared.

    Understand that this is being addressed as a Constitutional and legal issue, not a religious one.

    My bets come down to this:
    1) Does the 14th Amendment require states to issue marriage licenses to two people of the same sex?

    The Court will say “No”, 7-2 (maybe 6-3).

    2. Does the 14th Amendment require states to recognize same-sex marriages licensed in other states?

    The Court will say “No”, 5-4, citing existing interstate marriage laws and states’ rights.

    As such, we’ll continue the good fight of encouraging people to recognize that gay relationships are worthy of equal recognition and protection in the eyes of the law, even if one may not believe they are from a religious viewpoint.

  3. Brian Sanders April 28, 2015 at 10:19 pm #

    ‘We will not obey’: Christian leaders threaten civil disobedience if Supreme Court legalizes gay marriage

    http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2015/04/28/will-not-obey-christian-leaders-threaten-civil-disobedience-if-supreme-court/

    Signed by Mike Huckabee, Franklin Graham, Robert Jeffress, James Dobson, etc.

    • James Bradshaw April 28, 2015 at 10:35 pm #

      Brian, what’s to disobey? No one’s saying they have to do anything.

      Will they be forced to get gay married? No. Will their churches have to perform same sex weddings? No.

      They just want to riot. Tell them to join the folks in Baltimore. They can carry torches and throw bottles at cops like the thugs they are.

      • James Bradshaw April 28, 2015 at 10:48 pm #

        Despite my efforts to remain dispassionate, I guess I failed. The question was valid. The comment was not. Feel free to delete, Denny

  4. James Doran May 1, 2015 at 1:18 am #

    I could make numerous comments on these arguments, especially regarding reference to historical societies and cultures, as if we have documented them all since the dawn of time, and leaving out the fact that homosexuality has primarily been an unaccepted way of life, and those who are homosexual have been forced to hide it. But one thought I have in particular which I believe is certainly worth noting, and is not mentioned in any argument is that; imagine how this ruling might affect the youngest generation, who are currently struggling and battling with themselves over thier sexuallity, to the extent of taking their own lives. I’m certainly not suggesting that a ruling in favor of the petitioners would eliminate this, but I imagine it would certainly send a positive message. It could perhaps make it easier for gay childern who grow up post-ruling in favor, to find hope for a happy, loving, commited, recognized relationship in society’s eyes. I would also imagine that a ruling not in favor would send a very negative message to gay youth.

    I’d also note that we need to realize and accept that when it comes to sexual identity, there is absolutely no choice when it comes to sexual preference if you are homosexual. In fact, I would argue the word “preference” ever being used in conjunction with the word homosexuality. If you are someone that has the ability to choose, then you are not homosexual, but in fact bisexual.

    • Mike Norman May 1, 2015 at 11:29 pm #

      Mr. Doran: It has become politically popular to say and believe that “there is absolutely no choice when it comes to sexual preference,” but I am not aware of any medical evidence to support that statement.

      I find most interesting your statement, “imagine how this ruling might affect the youngest generation, who are currently struggling and battling with themselves over their sexuality…” How is it that you assume that someone “struggling” at the end of the struggle is gay? Have you considered that the opposite of your supposition might be true. Maybe the young person struggling will be encouraged to assume themselves gay and pursue that lifestyle when they otherwise may not have come to that conclusion except for societies acceptance of and promotion of the gay lifestyle.

      Your reference to “gay children” also concerns me. Most little boys until the time of puberty think little girls have “cooties” and they are not thinking much about sexual orientation. Little girls may be dreaming of a husband and children from the earliest of ages but except and unless they are sexualized in an abnormal way they are not thinking about sex or sexual orientation. So I would suggest that “gay children” are a construct of people such as yourself. However the court decides and wherever we fall on this issue it seems like we could agree to protect our children from exploitation.

      • James Doran May 2, 2015 at 4:27 pm #

        “How is it that you assume that someone “struggling” at the end of the struggle is gay?”

        My point was more of the struggle with being able to accept their attraction towards the same sex. My assumption was that someone who is actually gay might be able to accept it more easily if society were more accepting, acknowledging, and recognizing of it as well. This also ties back to my point about an actual choice, and my assumption is that there isn’t one (unless bisexual). I realize that the decision, if decided in favor of the petitioners, will most likely not turn the scales of acceptance from a societal perspective, at least not immediately, but from a governmental standpoint it would certainly make a positive statement to those who are struggling with the fact that they are gay.

        “Have you considered that the opposite of your supposition might be true. Maybe the young person struggling will be encouraged to assume themselves gay and pursue that lifestyle when they otherwise may not have come to that conclusion except for societies acceptance of and promotion of the gay lifestyle.”

        No, I have not considered this. But again I must go back to my point about choice. Assuming there is in fact no choice (unless bisexual), then this consideration, one might suppose, would not be a valid one. I’d also argue that the gay lifestyle cannot be “promoted” – if someone is heterosexual, I highly doubt they will “choose” to be gay because they can marry a member of the same sex, unless they are in fact gay or bisexual in the first place.

        “Most little boys until the time of puberty think little girls have “cooties” and they are not thinking much about sexual orientation. Little girls may be dreaming of a husband and children from the earliest of ages but except and unless they are sexualized in an abnormal way they are not thinking about sex or sexual orientation. So I would suggest that “gay children” are a construct of people such as yourself.

        To this I would point out that a vast majority of gay people exhibit behaviors and/or qualities of the opposite sex well before entering into school (sexual attraction completely aside). When I make reference to gay children, I mean gay people who were at one point in their lives, children. So with that said, “gay children” is not a construct of people such as myself, but a fact. I would also point out that a large majority of these children who exhibit traits and behaviors of the opposite sex do in fact end up being gay and/or struggling with their sexual identity (including transgender). If you were to ask any number of gay people (not sure how many you know, or how many you may have inquired about their childhood and their personal experiences), you might find that their parent(s) may have even suspected they were gay, and when they finally “came out” it was of no surprise to them.

        Finally, my comments are based on my own personal experience, and that of the numerous friends I have who have shared their own personal stories with me. I do not require any research to confirm or validate for me my standpoint on “choice”, just as you, assuming you are heterosexual, may not ever recall the time where you “chose” to be so, but instead always were. Also, any research is of course interesting, welcomed, and encouraged.

        Thanks for responding and sharing your perspective.

        • James Doran May 2, 2015 at 4:47 pm #

          One other quick thought if I may, since I had a moment to put some consideration to your point.

          “Have you considered that the opposite of your supposition might be true. Maybe the young person struggling will be encouraged to assume themselves gay and pursue that lifestyle when they otherwise may not have come to that conclusion except for societies acceptance of and promotion of the gay lifestyle.”

          One could argue this with; the way things are today encourages folks to assume themselves heterosexual and pursue that lifestyle when they otherwise may not have come to that conclusion except for societies disapproval and stigmatism of the gay lifestyle. Perfect example of this would be those who marry the opposite sex, divorce and/or seek same sex relations, or then “proclaim” themselves as “gay” or bisexual.

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. Brief Reflections on the Oral Arguments | Denny Burk - April 29, 2015

    […] would rule gay marriage to be a Constitutional right. Now that the case is in, I have listened to all of the arguments made by attorneys on both sides of the question. I have also listened to the Justices’ […]

  2. How the Federal Government May Put Christian Schools Out of Business | Acton PowerBlog - April 29, 2015

    […] While the primary issue is whether gay marriage will be required in every state in the union, one exchange highlighted how the upcoming ruling could affect religious liberty. Justice Samuel Alito asked […]

  3. Brief Reflections on the Oral Arguments | Prisoner of Christ - May 24, 2015

    […] would rule gay marriage to be a Constitutional right. Now that the case is in, I have listened to all of the arguments made by attorneys on both sides of the question. I have also listened to the Justices’ grilling […]

Comment here. Please use FIRST and LAST name.

Powered by WordPress. Designed by Woo Themes