Will the Supreme Court Upend Same-Sex Marriage and Other Landmark Rulings This Fall?

The U.S. Supreme Court is gearing up for a pivotal term this fall, with a docket that could reshape American law by revisiting high-profile precedents, including the landmark 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges decision that legalized same-sex marriage nationwide. As the court, led by a 6-3 conservative majority, prepares to reconvene in October 2025, legal experts and the public alike are bracing for potential shifts in rulings that have defined civil rights, executive power, and electoral laws for decades. Here’s a breakdown of the key cases and precedents at stake, why they matter, and what’s driving the speculation about the court’s direction.

The Stakes: Why Precedent Matters

The Supreme Court’s role is to interpret the Constitution, and its rulings often set binding precedents that shape American life. Overturning a precedent, known as abandoning stare decisis (the principle of adhering to prior decisions), can destabilize legal frameworks and public trust. Yet, the current court has shown a willingness to revisit settled law, as seen in the 2022 Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision that overturned Roe v. Wade. This history fuels concerns that other landmark rulings, like Obergefell, could be in jeopardy.

Same-Sex Marriage: Is Obergefell at Risk?

The 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges ruling, a 5-4 decision, guaranteed same-sex couples the right to marry under the 14th Amendment’s due process and equal protection clauses. This fall, a case brought by former Kentucky clerk Kim Davis, who refused to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples citing religious objections, has reignited debate. Davis, who was jailed for six days and ordered to pay $360,000 in damages and fees, is appealing to the Supreme Court, arguing that Obergefell was wrongly decided and infringes on religious liberty. Her attorney, Matthew Staver, claims the ruling lacks constitutional grounding and has caused “ruinous consequences” for individuals like Davis.

Legal scholars, however, are skeptical that Davis’ case is the right vehicle to overturn Obergefell. Daniel Urman, a law professor at Northeastern University, told Newsweek that while Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito might be open to revisiting the decision, Chief Justice John Roberts and others like Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett are less likely to support a full reversal. Public support for same-sex marriage remains strong—69% of Americans backed it in a 2024 Gallup poll, though down slightly from 71% in 2023. Additionally, the 2022 Respect for Marriage Act ensures federal recognition of same-sex marriages, offering some protection even if Obergefell were overturned. Still, a reversal could allow states to halt issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples, creating a patchwork of rights across the country.

Beyond Marriage: Other Precedents in the Crosshairs

The Supreme Court’s fall term includes cases that could challenge other long-standing rulings:

• Executive Power and Humphrey’s Executor v. United States (1935): This precedent protects leaders of independent federal agencies from being fired by the president without cause. Recent emergency orders allowing President Donald Trump to remove Biden-appointed agency heads suggest the court’s conservative majority may view this ruling as outdated. Georgetown University’s Victoria Nourse predicts it’s “next on the chopping block,” potentially expanding presidential power significantly.

• Campaign Finance and FEC v. Colorado Republican Federal Campaign Committee (2001): This decision upheld caps on political party spending coordinated with federal candidates. An appeal, initially filed by JD Vance among others, argues these limits violate modern campaign finance doctrines. Overturning it could unleash a flood of coordinated campaign funds, reshaping electoral dynamics.

• Voting Rights and Thornburg v. Gingles (1986): A Louisiana redistricting case could undermine this precedent, which protects minority voting power under the Voting Rights Act. If the court rules that creating majority-minority districts violates the 14th Amendment, it could weaken protections against racial gerrymandering, with nationwide implications for fair representation.

• Military Lawsuits and the Feres Doctrine (1950): This ruling bars service members from suing the government for injuries “incident to service.” A case involving the death of Air Force Staff Sgt. Cameron Beck could prompt the court to reconsider this controversial doctrine, potentially expanding legal recourse for military families.

Why Now? The Court’s Conservative Shift

The Supreme Court’s 6-3 conservative majority, solidified during Trump’s first term, has already overturned major precedents like Roe v. Wade and rulings on affirmative action. Data from the Supreme Court Database shows the Roberts court overturns precedents less frequently (1.5 times per term) than pre-Roberts courts (2.9 times per term since 1953). However, the court’s willingness to tackle contentious issues, coupled with public approval ratings still recovering from the Dobbs fallout, suggests a bold approach. Justices like Thomas, who in 2022 called for revisiting Obergefell alongside other due process cases, add to the uncertainty.

Public and Political Reactions

The prospect of overturning Obergefell has sparked concern among advocates. James Obergefell, the lead plaintiff, worries about eroding LGBTQ+ rights, especially as eight states introduced resolutions in 2025 urging the court to reverse the decision. Conversely, conservative groups, like the Liberty Counsel backing Davis, see her case as a chance to prioritize religious freedom. Meanwhile, the Respect for Marriage Act offers a fallback, but it doesn’t mandate states to issue marriage licenses, leaving room for legal battles if Obergefell falls.

What’s Next for the Court?

As the Supreme Court begins its term, all eyes will be on whether it takes up Davis’ case, set for conference on September 29, 2025. A decision to hear it could signal broader intentions to revisit Obergefell, though experts like Paul Collins from the University of Massachusetts Amherst argue the case’s focus on a jury verdict makes it a poor candidate for overturning marriage rights. Other cases, like those challenging Humphrey’s Executor or Thornburg v. Gingles, may have a stronger chance of altering legal landscapes due to their broader constitutional implications.

Engaging the Future

The Supreme Court’s upcoming term could redefine the balance between individual rights, governmental power, and electoral fairness. While Obergefell remains a flashpoint, the court’s handling of these cases will reflect its approach to precedent in an era of deep political division. For now, Americans await clarity on whether these landmark rulings will stand or fall.

Thought Questions:

1. Should the Supreme Court prioritize legal stability over revisiting controversial precedents like Obergefell?

2. How might overturning Humphrey’s Executor affect the balance of power between the president and independent agencies?

3. If Obergefell were overturned, how could the Respect for Marriage Act shape the future of same-sex marriage rights?