Civil and Human Rights

Bostic v. Schaefer

Bostic v. Schaefer is a federal-court challenge to discriminatory marriage laws in Virginia that prohibit same-sex marriage.

Case Summary

In February 2014, the district court ruled that these laws “significantly interfere with a fundamental right” and violate the plaintiffs’ rights to due process and equal protection guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment. The State Registrar of Vital Records and two local clerks filed an appeal with the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit; Virginia’s Attorney General has refused to defend the state’s marriage prohibition, and filed a brief in the Fourth Circuit in support of the couples challenging it.

On April 18, 2014, Constitutional Accountability Center and the Cato Institute jointly filed a friend of the court brief in the Fourth Circuit, urging the court of appeals to uphold the lower court’s decision. Our brief demonstrates that the text and history of the Fourteenth Amendment guarantee equality under the law and require equality of rights for all classes of persons and groups, including gay men and lesbians. The framers of the Fourteenth Amendment recognized the right to marry as a basic civil right of all persons. As our brief demonstrates, the Amendment’s sweeping guarantee of equality unambiguously applies to the plaintiffs in Bostic, and prohibits discriminatory marriage laws.

The Fourth Circuit heard oral argument in Bostic on May 13, 2014, and on July 29, 2014, affirmed the lower court’s ruling, as CAC had urged. The panel’s 2-1 decision declares that “denying same-sex couples [the choice to marry] prohibits them from participating fully in our society, which is precisely the type of segregation that the Fourteenth Amendment cannot countenance.” With its decision in Bostic, the Fourth Circuit became the second appellate court to rule that state bans on same-sex marriage are unconstitutional, following the Tenth Circuit’s decisions in Kitchen v. Herbert and Bishop v. Smith.

On October 6, 2014, the Supreme Court denied certiorari, thus allowing the 4th Circuit’s decision recognizing a constitutional right to same-sex marriage to stand, clearing the way for marriage equality in all of the states within that Circuit.

Case Timeline

More from Civil and Human Rights

Civil and Human Rights
December 5, 2024

Podcast (We the People): Can Tennessee Ban Medical Transitions for Transgender Minors?

National Constitution Center
A Tennessee law prohibits transgender minors from receiving gender transition surgery and hormone therapy. Professor Kurt...
Civil and Human Rights
December 4, 2024

RELEASE: Supreme Court Should Not Turn Equal Protection Clause on its Head in Case about Medical Care for Transgender Adolescents

WASHINGTON, DC – Following oral argument at the Supreme Court this morning in United States...
Civil and Human Rights
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Payan v. Los Angeles Community College District

In Payan v. Los Angeles Community College District, the Ninth Circuit is considering whether lost educational opportunities are compensable under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act. 
Civil and Human Rights
U.S. Supreme Court

Stanley v. City of Sanford

In Stanley v. City of Sanford, the Supreme Court is considering whether the Americans with Disabilities Act protects against disability discrimination with respect to retirement benefits distributed after employment. 
Civil and Human Rights
U.S. Supreme Court

United States v. Skrmetti

In United States v. Skrmetti, the Supreme Court is considering whether Tennessee’s ban on providing gender-affirming medical care to transgender adolescents violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Civil and Human Rights
July 31, 2024

Supreme Court Allows Cities to Punish Homelessness

The Regulatory Review
At the end of its 2023-24 term, the U.S. Supreme Court issued several divided decisions...
By: Brian R. Frazelle