The U.S. Supreme Court recently declined to revisit the landmark 2015 ruling that legalized same-sex marriage nationwide, rejecting a long-running challenge from former Kentucky clerk Kim Davis. The decision preserved the constitutional protections established under Obergefell v. Hodges, easing concerns among LGBTQ+ couples across the country — at least for now.

In Texas, where state law still defines marriage as between a man and a woman, uncertainty remains. For married couple Waya Kellie (they/them) and Asya Hooker (she/her), the ruling brought immediate relief followed by lingering questions about what the future may hold.

Hooker, a Black queer woman and U.S. military veteran, said she felt grateful that the Court did not use the case to revisit marriage equality. “I felt relief,” she said. “For now, it feels like they’re not trying to dismantle what we fought so hard to gain.”

Kellie — a Black trans, two-spirit creative — emphasized the significance of federal recognition for their marriage. “It gives us the same protections as any straight couple,” they said, pointing to rights such as medical decision-making and parental authority that could otherwise be denied.

The couple, married for nearly two years and now residing in Texas, note that their right to marry remains tied to a decision that opponents continue to challenge. “We worry that it could be overturned,” Kellie said. “We never really know what will happen next.”

Why Uncertainty Persists

The legal landscape remains complex. Although Congress passed the Respect for Marriage Act (RMA) in 2022, the bill does not permanently codify marriage equality into federal law. Instead, it requires states to recognize same-sex and interracial marriages performed elsewhere.

Texas is one of several states where a pre-Obergefell ban on performing same-sex marriages is still written into law. If the Supreme Court reversed the 2015 ruling, Texas could immediately reinstate its ban — even while being legally obligated to acknowledge out-of-state marriages.

Hooker said that possibility underscores the need for additional legal protections:
“We need stronger safeguards, both federally and statewide. No one should have to worry that the constitutionality of their marriage depends on political shifts.”

Rights Held — but Not Fully Secured

Advocates say the Supreme Court’s refusal to take up the Davis case may offer short-term reassurance. But for couples like Kellie and Hooker, whose rights remain vulnerable to future rulings, the question is how long this moment of stability will last.

For now, they continue living openly and legally married — while acknowledging that their marriage, unlike many others, remains subject to ongoing political debate.

“We’re proud of who we are and the life we’ve built,” Hooker said. “We just want our marriage respected and protected like anyone else’s.”