Statement on Supreme Court's Same-Sex Marriage Decisions - Cardinal Timothy M. Dolan and Archbishop Salvatore J. Cordileone

Sep 21, 2026

Upload by Hazel

Statement reporting on the U.S. Supreme Court’s June 26 decisions on same-sex marriage, issued by Cardinal Timothy M. Dolan and Archbishop Salvatore J. Cordileone. It describes the ruling that invalidated part of the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and the separate decision related to California’s Proposition 8, including the remand and legal-standing implications. The text emphasizes the Church leaders’ view that the court “got it wrong,” calling on federal and state laws to respect the truth of marriage.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryReligion & Spirituality

FormatPDF

Pages16

Reading Time40 min

AccessFree to download

Statement on Supreme Court's Same-Sex Marriage Decisions

Supreme Court Overturns Key Part of Defense of Marriage Act

Marygroye College Lib8425 West McNichols RoaDetroit,MI 4822 4e1(-( “The truth of marriage endures,and we will continue to boldlyproclaim it with confidence andcharity.” CNS documentary serVice Statement onSupreme Court'sSame-Sex MarriageDecisions Cardinal Dolan andArchbishop Cordileone "The Supreme Court has dealt a profoundinjustice to the American people,"said NewYork Cardinal Timothy M.Dolan,presidentof the U.S.Conference of Catholic Bishops,and San Francisco Archbishop Salvatore J.Cordileone,chairman of the U.S.bish-ops'Subcommittee for the Promotion andDefense of Marriage,in a June 26 statementthe day the Supreme Court handed downhistoric decisions on same-sex marriage.“Thecourt got it wrong,"the prelates said.“Thefederal government ought to respect the truth that marriage is the union of one man andone woman,even where states fail to do so."The Supreme Court ruled in a 5-4 opinionthat a key part of the federal Defense ofMarriage Act,or DOMA,is unconstitutional;the court said that homosexuals married instates where same-sex marriage is legal areentitled to the same federal benefits as het-erosexual married couples,whereas DOMAdefined marriage as between one man andone woman.In a separate case,the courtsent back to lower courts a challenge toCalifornia's Proposition 8,the voter-approvedinitiative barring same-sex marriage.In thissecond 5-4 ruling,with a different lineup ofjustices,the court remanded the case back tothe lower federal courts,saying the individu-als who defended the lawin court lacked legalstanding to do so;the decision seems to openthe way for same-sex marriages to resume inCalifornia,at least temporarily.In both cases,the Supreme Court sidestepped the issue ofwhether there is a federal constitutional rightto same-sex marriage.Neither decision willhave the effect of requiring states to honorsame-sex marriages from other jurisdictions.Cardinal Dolan and Archbishop Cordileone'sstatement follows. oday is a tragic day for marriageand our nation.The Supreme Courthas dealt a profound injustice to theAmerican people by striking downin part the federal Defense of Marriage ActThe court got it wrong.The federal gov-ernment ought to respect the truth that continued on page 130 contents 129 Statement on SupremeCourt's Same-SexMarriage Decisionsby Cardinal Timothy M.Dolan and ArchbishopSalvatore J.Cordileone130 Supreme Court OverturnsKey Part of Defense ofMarriage Actby Justice AnthonyKennedy139Homily at Mass OpeningFortnight for Freedomby Archbishop William E.Lori141Catholic-Jewish DialogueEnriches Faith,Humanityby Pope Francis142Hunger and MalnutritionAre Truly Scandalousby Pope Francis144 Datebook On File 144 July 4,2013 Volume 43 Number 9 Following is ChiefJusticeJolu Roberts'dissentingopinion in the DOMA case,known as Uuited States v.Windsor: “I agree witlu Justice Scaliathat this court lacks jurisdic-tion to review the decisionsofthe courts belou.On thenierits of the constitutioualdispute the court decidesto decide.I also agree withJustice Scalia that Cougressacted coustitutionallyinpassiug the Defense ofMarriage Act(DOMA). "Interests in uniformity andstability aniplyjustifiedCongress'decision to retainthe definition of marriagethat,at that point,had beelladopted by every state in ournation and every nation inthe world.Post,at 19-20(dis-senting opinion). "The nuajority sees a moresinister nuotive.pointing outthat the federal goverumenthas generally(though uotuniformly)deferred to statedefinitious of inarriage in thepast.That is true,of course,but uone of those priorstate-by-state variations hadinvolved differences oversomething—as the majorityputs it—'thought ofby mostpeople as esseutial to thevery defiuition of[marriage]and to its role and functiouthroughout the history ofcivilization.'Ante,at 13. "That the federal governmenttreated tlis fundaineutalquestion differently than ittreated variations over con-sanguinity or minimun ageis hardly surprising—andhardly enough to

FAQs

What did the Supreme Court rule regarding the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA)?

The Court ruled that a key part of DOMA is unconstitutional, extending federal benefits to same-sex married couples in states where same-sex marriage is legal.

What happened in the case involving California’s Proposition 8?

The Court sent the Proposition 8 challenge back to lower federal courts, stating that the individuals defending the law lacked legal standing.

What position do Cardinal Dolan and Archbishop Cordileone take in their statement?

They argue that the Court’s decisions are a profound injustice and contend that federal and state laws must respect the truth that marriage is the union of one man and one woman.

Sep 21, 2026

Upload by Hazel