A key point from the Supreme Court’s marriage equality decision is that marriage should be treated as a right.
It’s the first time the justices have considered whether the Constitution gives same-sex couples the same legal protections that heterosexual couples enjoy.
The justices heard arguments Monday on a case that challenges a California law that says couples can’t get married if their partners have a history of mental illness.
If the court rules in favor of same-gender couples, that could mean more couples will get married in California, where the law is in effect.
The court’s decision Monday could set a precedent that could be used in other states.
The case involves two couples from California, who have been together for more than a decade.
They’ve had two children together.
The state law, which took effect in 2013, says that if a couple is married in the state, the state cannot change the state’s civil status to “federal recognition” unless they’ve been in a relationship for more that five years.
The law also says that a couple cannot have an interracial relationship if they were previously married in a state that had a law that made that legal.
The court’s majority opinion says that the California law is unconstitutional because it violates a federal law that prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, sex, national origin, disability, age, religion or sexual orientation.
The majority opinion also says California’s same-marriage law is an overreach that violates the Equal Protection Clause.
The same-race couples in the California case argued that their marriage was valid because their relationship was based on a shared commitment and that they are both “of the same sex.”
The ruling says that’s not true.
If the court upholds the ruling, the court will likely take the case to the full Supreme Court.
The high court’s 5-4 majority in 2016 rejected the idea of gay couples having a right to marry and said same- sex couples can get married, but not in states that have such laws.
The decision set a crucial precedent that has been applied by other states to many other issues.
The ruling also opens up the possibility of states changing their marriage laws to comply with the Supreme Council of Europe ruling that legalized gay marriage across Europe in 2013.
On Tuesday, the Associated Press reported that three people in the court case had asked for more time to prepare for oral arguments, saying they wanted more information on the court’s ruling before the decision is released.
The Supreme Court on Monday said it was waiting for more information from the government to make an official announcement.
Follow Josh Hicks on Twitter at twitter.com/josh.hicksAP