In Obergefell v. Hodges, the Court held that the Fourteenth Amendment requires states to license marriages between two people of the same sex and recognize lawful same-sex marriages performed elsewhere. The decision relied on the interaction between liberty and equality: excluding same-sex couples denied both a fundamental choice and equal legal status. Current law therefore does not leave recognition of same-sex marriage solely to each state's preference.

Congress later enacted the Respect for Marriage Act, which supplies federal statutory recognition rules and protects recognition of marriages valid where celebrated. The statute and Obergefell reinforce parts of the same legal landscape but rest on different authority. Obergefell states a constitutional licensing and recognition rule for government. The Act is legislation and should not be described as a constitutional amendment or as the source of the Fourteenth Amendment right. Identifying the source matters because constitutional and statutory claims can differ in defendants, coverage, and remedy.

A state may require every couple to obtain the same marriage license; that is administration. A law forbidding marriage only for an interracial or same-sex couple imposes a constitutional burden. A rule requiring an indigent parent to pay all child-support arrears before marrying directly blocks entry into marriage and demands more than a claim of administrative convenience. Identify the government actor, the precise barrier, whether it is direct and substantial, and whether liberty, equality, or both supply the governing route.

Video lesson: Due process and the right to privacy | AP US Government & Politics | Khan Academy