Orchestrated by a Republican controlled legislature, North Carolina voters banned same sex marriage with Amendment One to the state constitution in 2012. The national environment at the time showed that conservative states that didn’t have a constitutional amendment about same-sex marriage might face state supreme courts’ challenges on the issue. Driven by the fear of same-sex marriage’s legalization, Republican lawmakers launched a campaign in the hope of avoiding any controversial legal battles in the future.
But a federal judge’s decision astonished the North Carolina voters who hit the ballot two years ago. According The News & Observer, U.S. District Court Judge Max Cogburn issued a ruling that North Carolina laws that prohibit same sex marriage “refusing to recognize same sex marriage originating from elsewhere, and/or threatenwing to penalize those who would solemnize such marriages, are unconstitutional.”
The Supreme Court also declined to hear any appealing cases regarding the same-sex marriage ban, sending a strong message that the highest court lacks a majority to reverse the lower court’s decision. The refusal to hear cases gives no hope for North Carolinian voters to continue the battle in the courthouse, at least in the current Supreme Court session.
The fight has ended in the district court, but both sides have turned the case into a political skirmish in North Carolina’s upcoming midterm election. Opponents of the recent decision say that the turnout rate was only 34 percent of NC voters, which isn’t enough to assess the state’s overall thoughts on the issue.
However, supporters argue that the 61 percent who supported Amendment One in 2012 was only of those who showed up, not all NC voters. When comparing all registered voters, only 21 percent of North Carolinians actually voted in support of Amendment One. That was not the majority back in 2012 either.
This legal case has become a key factor in determining the turn out rate for the midterm election, given the current political environment in the state. The overturn of the ban seemed to defeat Republicans’ effort to change the state marriage law. Some Republicans had already foreseen that the ban would be lifted sooner or later, yet the overturn came faster than expected.
Since the case has gained national attention, it may cause supporters of the old ban as well as some moderates to fight Cogburn’s decision. These people will pick up the fight in November by choosing Senator Hagan’s challenger, Thom Tillis, speaker of the state House, who insists to continue fighting through legal means. If Tillis’ challenge were to succeed, he would probably block the president’s nominations of district court judges, slowly working toward reversing the decision.
Politicians and the media usually politicize many legal cases, whether in the Supreme Court or lower courts, to confuse or stir up the general public in elections. That might erode the confidence of rule of law and judicial independence in the country. Most of the time, judges do not have as many options as people think if following the common law system. In the case of North Carolina’s constitutional amendment, the two federal judges have no choice since the Supreme Court decided to drop the case before the ruling came out. Following the precedents, there is no surprise that Judge Cogburn struck down the amendment.
