Plaintiff and defendant from Obergefell v. Hodges unite to oppose Barrett's confirmation

Both namesakes of Obergefell v. Hodges, the landmark 2015 Supreme Court decision legalizing same-sex marriage, are opposing the confirmation of Judge Amy Coney BarrettAmy Coney BarrettLocked and Loaded: Supreme Court is ready for a showdown on the Second Amendment Biden's Supreme Court commission ends not with a bang but a whimper Biden's Supreme Court reform study panel notes 'considerable' risks to court expansion MORE to the court Tuesday.

“We ask the Senate to vote no on this nomination,” Jim Obergefell, who was the plaintiff in the case, said in a livestreamed press conference on Tuesday. “Judge Barrett's well-known stances on marriage equality, trans equality and other issues represent a serious risk to our civil rights and our ability to form and protect our families.”

Rick Hodges, who represented the Ohio Department of Health in the case, said Barrett’s confirmation could jeopardize “all Americans [being] treated with full dignity and respect regardless of who they are or whom they love” and benefiting “equally and fully from government services.”


“I can't stress enough how important I believe it is that the two opposing sides of such a momentous ruling can stand together as friends and defend the LGBTQ+ communities,” Obergefell said.

The two were joined by Democratic Sens. Sherrod BrownSherrod Campbell BrownAmerica can end poverty among its elderly citizens Senate GOP signals they'll help bail out Biden's Fed chair Building back better by investing in workers and communities MORE (Ohio), Patty MurrayPatricia (Patty) Lynn MurrayOvernight Health Care — Presented by Carequest — Colin Powell's death highlights risks for immunocompromised Senate Democrats ditch Hyde amendment for first time in decades Building strong public health capacity across the US MORE (Wash.) and Ron WydenRonald (Ron) Lee WydenDemocrats narrow scope of IRS proposal amid GOP attacks Democrats scramble for climate alternatives Overnight Energy & Environment — Presented by the American Petroleum Institute — Democrats address reports that clean energy program will be axed MORE (Ore.).

The press conference, which was organized by LGBTQ rights organization Family Equality, comes amid concerns that a 6-3 conservative majority on the high court could put LGBTQ rights at risk.

Two of the dissenters in Obergefell v. Hodges, Justices Clarence ThomasClarence ThomasLocked and Loaded: Supreme Court is ready for a showdown on the Second Amendment Two conservatives resign from Biden's Supreme Court commission Sotomayor says recent changes were made because male justices interrupted female colleagues MORE and Samuel AlitoSamuel AlitoLocked and Loaded: Supreme Court is ready for a showdown on the Second Amendment The Hill's Morning Report - Presented by Altria - Jan. 6 panel flexes its muscle Sen. Whitehouse blasts Alito speech: 'You have fouled your nest, not us' MORE, criticized the ruling earlier this month in another dissent after the court allowed a lawsuit against former Kentucky county clerk Kim Davis to proceed. Two gay couples are suing Davis for refusing to issue marriage licenses to them in 2015.

In the same conference, Brown expressed openness to expanding the Supreme Court, a strategy many on the left support. Democratic presidential nominee Joe BidenJoe BidenWhite House: Window for finalizing sweeping budget package 'closing' Jayapal says tuition-free community college 'probably won't' be in spending plan Jan. 6 panel votes to hold Bannon in contempt MORE has previously said he is “not a fan” of the idea.

“Depending on what happens — what happens to the [Affordable Care Act], what happens to Roe v. Wade, what happens to marriage equality — all things are on the table,” Brown said.