They will lose on the moral argument.
When I heard what the triggered the Supreme Court to consider this case I understood the problem.
It’s not about sexual preference, it’s about transfer of wealth laws.
I bet SCOTUS remands this back to the states, telling them to come up with a fairer way to administer transfer of wealth.
As for the Feds, perhaps they can open the gift tax exemption to say $25,000 per year and allow life insurance inheritance benefits to be treated the same regardless of marital relationship status of the beneficiary.
In any event, this is an inheritance law case; not a sexual preference case.
There are no moral absolutes.......Atlas Shrugged.....
Of course it’s all about inheritance ~
It annoys me that most of the arguments about the unfairness of marriage laws is really because the government decided that so many issues of government interaction with wealth were going to be determined by marriage.
So, there’s a lesbian couple, and the one is in the military, under “don’t ask, don’t tell”. She dies, and the other member of the couple isn’t even invited to a ceremony. Isn’t allowed to get the effects. Doesn’t get the death benefit.
Maybe we just need to allow a person to assign their “custodial rights” to any other individual, without regard to marriage. That would solve most of the problems, without ruining marriage.