Supreme Court's ruling pleases Obergefell

SANDUSKY — Sandusky resident Jim Obergefell is praising a decision by the U.S. Supreme Court to preserve same-sex marriage. The named plaintiff in the landmark Supreme Court case legalizing such unions made those remarks after the court refused to consider an appeal from an opponent of same-sex marriage. Gay rights advocates had worried that the U.S. Supreme Court would take up the appeal filed by Kim Davis, a former Kentucky county clerk who opposed the court's Obergefell v. Hodges ruling in 2015 that legalized same-sex marriages. The Supreme Court rejected Davis' appeal on Monday. It did not provide a reason. 'Court did the right thing' Reached by phone Monday shortly after the decision was announced, Obergefell said he is relieved and pleased. "The court did the right thing," he said. "I'm glad the court said no. Today, I'm going to celebrate." Obergefell said he had been concerned, given the current conservative makeup of the U.S. Supreme Court. "I had no faith in this court to do the right thing and refuse her appeal," he said. And he said he expects attempts will continue to overturn the Obergefell ruling. "All we can do is keep fighting to make sure in the future marriage equality continues to exist," he said. Worries compounded by Roe reversal Any attempt to overturn the ruling would affect many people in the U.S. According to the Williams Institute, "There are an estimated 823,000 married same-sex couples in the U.S." Nearly 600,000 same-sex couples have married since the 2015 ruling, the institute said in a recent press release. The Williams Institute is a research institute connected to UCLA's law school. Obergefell said that although he remains worried, he had been told by legal experts that there was little chance the Supreme Court would accept the appeal. Even if the Court had taken the case on First Amendment grounds, there was little chance the Court would have overturned its earlier ruling, a former law professor at Case Western Reserve University asserted Monday on X.com. "To no one's surprise, the Supreme Court denied the petition asking it to reconsider same-sex marriage," wrote Jonathan Adler, now a law professor at William & Mary Law School. "The alarms were a product of sensationalized reporting magnified by grifter know-nothings. Even if the court had granted cert on the (First Amendment) defense issues in the petition, (same sex marriage) was not going to be reconsidered," Adler wrote. Others on X.com who replied to Adler noted that it's natural gay people would be concerned. "Roe was overturned after 50 years of the Court protecting abortion rights. Forgive gay people for being worried that our marriage rights, all of 10 years old, might not be solidified precedent," wrote one user on X.com.