Same-sex marriage rights
Hollingsworth v. Perry
In brief
The Court ruled that Proposition 8’s sponsors could not appeal and sent the case back without deciding whether the measure was constitutional.
- Where it stands
- Decided
Decided 5-4 · June 26, 2013 · Opinion by Chief Justice Roberts
- What it’s about
- The Supreme Court ruled that Dennis Hollingsworth and the other Proposition 8 sponsors lacked the legal right to appeal the federal trial court’s decision striking down California’s same-sex marriage ban.
- Who it affects
- The sponsors could not appeal the trial court’s order, and the Supreme Court did not decide whether Proposition 8 was constitutional.
Summary: written with AI from the case record.
What it's about
It wiped out the Ninth Circuit’s judgment (vacated it) and sent the case back to that court (remanded), without deciding whether the ban violated the Constitution.
California voters approved Proposition 8, a measure defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman.
Question presented
1. Do the petitioners have standing under Article III of the Constitution to argue this case? 2. Does the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment prohibit the state of California from defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman?
What the Court decided
Holding
Petitioners did not have standing to appeal the District Court’s order. 671 F. 3d 1052, vacated and remanded.
- Result
- Vacated
The vote
From the opinions
“Under California law, a proponent has the authority to appear in court and assert the State’s interest in defending an enacted initiative when the public officials charged with that duty refuse to do so.”
What's next
The Ninth Circuit must handle the case again after its judgment was wiped out. The Supreme Court left the constitutional question unresolved.
Documents
Opinions
Audio
Docket activity
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Case Briefing
New analysis added
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Impact Analysis
Show 6 moreShow fewer
AI analysis generated: Opinion Summary
AI analysis generated: Decision Record
Case data updated: summary, question_presented, generation_metadata
Case data updated: question_presented, extraction_metadata
Audio Recording added: Oral Arguments - Hollingsworth
Opinion added: Hollingsworth
More questions
- What did Justice Kennedy argue in his separate opinion?
- He said California law authorized initiative sponsors to defend an approved measure when public officials charged with doing so refused.
Sources
Primary materials plus reporting. Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.