Also known as: fundamental rights to marry · right to marry · fundamental marriage right
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A liberty interest protected by the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment that encompasses the decision of two consenting adults to enter a committed marital relationship. Statutory classifications that significantly interfere with exercise of the right cannot stand unless supported by sufficiently important state interests and closely tailored to effectuate only those interests.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Mike owes unpaid child support subject to wage garnishment. The state labor agency informs him that he must obtain court clearance before marrying his prospective spouse or the garnishment will remain in effect. Mike challenges the clearance rule as an unconstitutional burden on his ability to marry.
Jordan and Miguel, a same-sex couple, apply for a marriage license. The county clerk refuses under a state constitutional provision limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples. The couple sues in federal court seeking an order requiring issuance of the license.
Naomi is married to Dana in a lawful same-sex marriage performed in another state. Her employer, a state-licensed hospital, denies spousal visitation and medical decision-making rights based on local regulations that ignore the marriage. Naomi sues to compel equal recognition of her marital status.
An incarcerated assembly-line worker seeks to marry his coworker fiancée. Prison officials bar the marriage citing risks of collusion that could disrupt manufacturing quotas. The worker challenges the blanket prohibition as lacking any reasonable relationship to legitimate penological interests.
A testator's will conditions a son's inheritance on marriage to a Jewish woman whose both parents are Jewish within seven years of death. The son, unmarried and twenty-one, challenges the condition as an unconstitutional interference with his fundamental right to marry.
A prison regulation requires superintendent approval before an inmate may marry another adult. Officials deny approval to an inmate seeking to marry his fiancée, asserting general security concerns without evidence that the marriage itself threatens institutional order.
A statutory classification that significantly interferes with the exercise of the fundamental right to marry cannot be upheld unless it is supported by sufficiently important state interests and is closely tailored to effectuate only those interests.
Supporting sources
The Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses protect the fundamental right to marry and require that states treat same-sex couples on the same terms as opposite-sex couples with respect to that right, including both the ability to enter civil marriage and governmental recognition of those marriages.
…than the absence of physical restraint." The Court has said that the liberty protected by the Due Process Clause includes the right to marry, Loving v. Virginia , 388 U.S. 1 (1967); the right to have children, Skinner v. Oklahoma ex rel. Williamson , 316 U.S. 535 (1942); the right to direct the education and upbringing of…
…to teach a foreign language in a parochial school. Building on these cases, we have held that the term "liberty" includes a right to marry
…by eugenic marriage
…by the State. The interests associated with marriage and divorce have repeatedly been accorded particular deference, and the right to marry
…argument that the condition in question violates constitutional safeguards is based upon the premise that the right to marry
Supporting sources
Once a state or state actor makes benefits turn on marital status, it may not treat same-sex marriages as lesser or refuse to recognize them simply because of the sex of the spouses or the source state of the marriage license.
Supporting sources
Regulations that restrict the constitutional rights of prison inmates are valid if they are reasonably related to legitimate penological interests, and a regulation requiring superintendent approval before an inmate could marry another adult was found invalid because it was not reasonably related to any asserted penological objective.
Supporting sources