The issue regarding same sex couples has been in the headlines for quite a while. However, the concerns at present are not so much the legality of the marriage but the issue of government subsidized benefits and whether they should be offered to same sex couples.
Jack Pidgeon and Larry Hicks sued on the grounds that the legalization of same sex marriage does not detail any package of tax benefits, employee fringe benefits or testimonial privileges. But the court did not agree!
Many are celebrating the fact that the Texas Supreme court reversed a lower court’s ruling that marriage benefits be offered to same sex couples by employers.
Sarah Kate Ellis, President and CEO of GLAAD said, “The Texas Supreme Court’s decision this morning is a warning shot to all LGBTQ Americans that the war on marriage equality is ever-evolving, and anti-LGBTQ activists will do anything possible to discriminate against our families.”
While the decision has been sent back to the lower courts, many believe that if it needs to be reevaluated, it will be sent back up to a higher court to refute a second time. So back and forth it will go – at least in the interim.
Young Conservatives reports:
Texas courts ruled on Friday that the Supreme Court’s decision on gay marriage does not effectively address whether states are required to give those couples marriage benefits, according to The Daily Caller.
This is super interesting because it could mean another round of gay marriage rulings, pending the way higher courts rule on the issue.