Liberal fear-mongering about the Supreme Court’s alleged plot to destroy same-sex marriage has been thoroughly debunked as the conservative-majority Court continues to leave marriage equality intact despite years of apocalyptic predictions.
Story Highlights
- Supreme Court has taken no action to overturn Obergefell v. Hodges despite liberal hysteria following the Dobbs decision
- Only Justice Thomas suggested reconsidering marriage precedent, with no other conservative justices joining his position
- Congress passed the Respect for Marriage Act in 2022, providing additional legislative protections beyond court precedent
- Three years of liberal predictions about imminent marriage equality destruction have proven completely unfounded
Liberal Panic Proves Baseless After Three Years
The Supreme Court’s 2022 Dobbs decision overturning Roe v. Wade sent liberal activists and Democratic politicians into hysterics, claiming the conservative majority was systematically targeting all progressive precedents. Despite Justice Clarence Thomas’s concurring opinion suggesting reconsideration of substantive due process cases including Obergefell v. Hodges, no other conservative justice has endorsed this position. The Court has declined to hear any cases directly challenging same-sex marriage rights through November 2025.
Same-sex marriage remains fully legal and recognized nationwide, contradicting years of Democratic fundraising appeals and media hysteria about imminent constitutional rollbacks. The gap between liberal rhetoric and judicial reality exposes how progressive organizations weaponize fear to mobilize their base and extract donations from concerned supporters.
Congressional Action Strengthens Marriage Protections
Rather than waiting for imaginary Court action, Congress passed the Respect for Marriage Act in December 2022, requiring federal and interstate recognition of same-sex marriages performed where legal. This bipartisan legislation received support from twelve Republican senators, demonstrating broader acceptance of marriage equality than liberal activists acknowledge. The law provides an additional legislative backstop while Supreme Court precedent remains the ultimate constitutional authority.
Religious liberty protections within the Act address conservative concerns about forced participation in ceremonies conflicting with faith beliefs. This balanced approach reflects the legislation’s practical focus on legal recognition rather than cultural mandate, contrasting sharply with progressive demands for universal ideological compliance.
Court Demonstrates Judicial Restraint on Precedent
Constitutional law experts recognize significant differences between the abortion and marriage equality cases that liberal activists ignore. Obergefell enjoys broader public support and deeper legal entrenchment than Roe v. Wade possessed, making reversal politically and jurisprudentially unlikely. The conservative justices have shown sensitivity to public opinion and institutional legitimacy concerns that restrain dramatic precedent reversals.
Liberals are DELUSIONAL! LMAO! https://t.co/eONhhIS5Z7
— TruthLab (@RightMindsMedia) November 11, 2025
Legal scholars note that overturning Obergefell would require a direct constitutional challenge and five justices willing to reverse established precedent, neither of which has materialized. The Court’s consistent rejection of marriage-related appeals demonstrates respect for settled law despite conservative legal organizations’ theoretical arguments about constitutional interpretation.
Sources:
Obergefell v. Hodges – Wikipedia
