The Supreme Court concluded debate on cases that could grant legally married same-sex couples the right to federal marital benefits Wednesday.
Tuesdays debates focused on Hollingsworth v. Perry, a case that challenged Proposition 8, which made same-sex unions illegal in California in 2008. On Wednesday, US v. Windsor was debated in court, which challenges the federal Defense of Marriage Act, DOMA, which restricts federal marriage benefits to only heterosexual marriages recognized in all states.
When DOMA was signed into law in 1996 one of the purposes of the House of Representatives was to express moral disapproval of homosexuality, according to the Associated Press. Since that date, nine states and the District of Columbia have made same-sex marriages legal. A poll conducted by the Pew Research Center stated that 49 percent of Americans are now in favor of allowing gays and lesbians to legally marry.
It is possible the court could rule that the Proposition 8 ban on gay marriage is unconstitutional and that gay marriage is a constitutionally protected right. Gay marriage could also be declared unconstitutional by the Court.
There was no apparent majority opinion expressed by the justices during Tuesdays debates, according to the Associated Press.
The justices could dismiss the case on procedural grounds, which would leave in place the appeals court ruling against Proposition 8 and apply only to California. Many are skeptical that the courts would make an absolute decision for or against gay
marriage without a significant amount of precedent.
A majority of the justices seemed to indicate they would invalidate at least part of DOMA on Wednesday, the Associated Press reported. This could represent a victory for gay rights advocates nationally, but would not be a total endorsement of gay marriage.
It would, however, give same-sex couples access to more than 1,100 federal statutes where marital status is relevant, such as tax breaks and Social Security survivor benefits.
Justice Anthony Kennedy, who often acts as the deciding vote in close cases, said DOMA seems to intrude on states rights to recognize same-sex marriages and unions.
When federal statutes are affected, which in our society means that the federal government is intertwined with the citizens day-to-day life, you are at real risk of running in conflict with what has always been thought to be the essence of the state police power, which is to regulate marriage, divorce, custody, Kennedy said in an Associated Press report.
DOMA and Proposition 8 which address gay marriage on a national level and political and social happenings at to Texas A&M have drawn students attention to the topic.
Students, those who support the legality of gay marriage and those who dont, spoke up regarding recent news surrounding the issue.
Katheryn Scott, sophomore international studies major, said she feels she is discriminated against for her support of heterosexual marriage.
I have felt persecuted for my belief that homosexuality is a sin, Scott said. I dont support any sin whether that is lying, cheating or homosexuality. I feel that as Christians, we have a right to stand up for our values like traditional marriage and not feel like we are going to get ridiculed for having a different view.
Junior computer science major Mitchell Taylor said the religious facet of the argument, which appears to be a major part of the debate on the Texas A&M campus, does not apply to a legal debate.
I support gay marriage, Taylor said. I do not think the state government should have any say in the matter. If people are religious it should be left up to their religious institution to decide what the definition of marriage is.
Bethany Lefner, junior entomology major, said she also supports same-sex marriage.
We live in the United States and people should have a right to make their own decisions and marry who they want to marry, Lefner said.
Mikayla Hall, sophomore international studies major, agreed with Scotts notion of persecution.
Honestly, I do not support gay marriage and feel that on this campus, as a Christian, I am being persecuted for my belief, Hall said. I think its important to stick to our morals and values about what we believe.
The GLBT Resource Center declined to comment on the Supreme Court argument because they said they are a politically neutral organization.
Student Senate introduced a March 20 bill that would recommend that students who religiously oppose the GLBT Resource Center be able to withhold the portion of their student fees that go toward the center.
The Associated Press contributed to this article