This is going to be nuanced, please read all of the 馃У I do not know what will happen. Anything I say is speculation; the sort of guesswork I would've felt irresponsible to post pre-Dobbs. But given the path we may be heading down, I will share my thinking.
Replying to @mattbc
Legally, if I was married as a woman, still have F on my driver's license, but NB on my medical - can they anull my marriage to my husband? I was going to get X on my new passport, but now completely scared to, and wondering if I should have medical change it back to F.
1
27
2
80
This is going to be nuanced, please read all of the 馃У Generally, the worldview that those who want to overturn Obergefell subscribe to is also hostile to the existence (and legal recognition) of non-binary people.
1
5
43
This is going to be nuanced, please read all of the 馃У If Obergefell is reversed, if SCOTUS flips and rules that there is no right to same-sex marriage protected by the US Constitution, then (in that horrific scenario) what we'd expect to happen is a return to the states.
1
3
27
This is going to be nuanced, please read all of the 馃У In 2003, the Massachusetts supreme court ruled in "Goodridge v Dept of Pub Hlth" that the MA Constitution required the legal recognition of same sex marriage It is a beautiful opinion masscases.com/cases/sjc/440/鈥
1
4
34
This is going to be nuanced, please read all of the 馃У And bc of that state supreme court opinion, same sex couples could be legally wed in Massachusetts. And MA was required to recognize their marriage. But the federal gov't didn't, and other states weren't required to either.
1
2
25
This is going to be nuanced, please read all of the 馃У A law called the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) that Bill Clinton signed in 1996 said that if a state recognized a same-sex marriage, no other state had to + kept the fed gov't from doing so en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defens鈥
1
5
23
This is going to be nuanced, please read all of the 馃У In US v Windsor (2013) SCOTUS said the federal gov't had to recognize same-sex marriages, striking down that part of DOMA. Obergefell made the rest of DOMA moot by requiring all states perform & recognize same sex marriages

Jun 30, 2022 路 4:51 AM UTC

1
4
32
nuanced, please read all of the 馃У That's why I'm saying we'd expect, if SCOTUS reverses Obergefell, that marriage would 'return to the states' 鈥 it'd be a state by state issue again. (And that's a mess.)
1
3
32
nuanced, please read all of the 馃У It is, in full-faith-and-credit kinds of ways, logistically easier for SCOTUS to reverse the constitutional recognition of the right to abortion, the right to contraception, even the right to same-sex-sex (Lawrence).
1
2
19
nuanced, please read all of the 馃У There's much less case law on non-binary anything than on same-sex marriage Things I'd think about: do you live in a friendly or a hostile state? If your gender marker were to revert, would you be in an opposite-sex or same-sex marriage?
1
2
22
nuanced, please read all of the 馃У Need to wrap this up for tonight, want to once again stress this is all speculation & guesswork. We don't know what's going to happen. I think we're still at the place where we can influence what path we go down.
2
25