I totally understand that court rulings can be complicated and that there often is more than meets the eye.
Thus, the Texas Supreme Court ruled that Houston city employees aren’t guaranteed all spousal rights if they’re married to someone of the same sex.
The state’s highest civil appellate court said in its ruling that the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling that legalized gay marriage didn’t cover all the benefit rights that one thought might accrue for the same-sex spouses. As the Texas Tribune reported: “As part of a case challenging Houstonās benefits policy, the Supreme CourtĀ suggested a landmark ruling legalizing same-sex marriage does not fully address the right to marriage benefits.Ā Justice Jeffrey Boyd, writing on behalf of the court in a 24-page opinion, said thereās still room for state courts to explore the ‘reach and ramifications’ of the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2015 ruling inĀ Obergefell v. Hodges.”
I admit readily that I’m a bit slow on the uptake at times. However, as I read the U.S. Supreme Court decision on this matter, I am certain I read something about the court deciding that the 14th Amendment’s “equal protection” extended to gay couples just as it does to all American citizens. The U.S. Constitution is clear in its guarantee of equal protection under the law to every American; it doesn’t take Americans’ sexual orientation into account.
Why, then, aren’t same-sex spouses entitled to the same rights as those involved in heterosexual marriages?
My hope would be that the U.S. Supreme Court could clear up, somehow, this apparent discrepancy.