When the U.S. Supreme Court hears four cases this spring challenging state bans on marriage for same-sex couples, most of the plaintiffs will be parents. Let’s meet some of them.
First, just revel in the sheer adorableness of Ohio plaintiffs Pam and Nicole Yorksmith and their baby. If the Supreme Court doesn’t want them to be a family, there’s no hope.
The Supreme Court will review four cases, from Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, and Tennessee. Ohio plaintiffs include three couples who conceived through donor insemination and gave birth in Ohio: Brittani Henry and Brittni Rogers, Georgia Nicole Yorksmith and Pamela Yorksmith, and Kelly Noe and Kelly McCracken. The other couple, Joseph Vitale and Robert Talmas, live in New York City but adopted a son born in Ohio. In addition to marriage, they all want to be able to place both parents on their children’s birth certificates. See the dads’ video below.
Their case was combined with that of three other Ohio plaintiffs, including David Michener, who had been raising three children with his late spouse, William Herbert Ives. William died unexpectedly shortly after their marriage in Delaware in 2013, and David is fighting to have their marriage reflected on William’s death certificate.
In the Tennessee case, two of the three plaintiff couples are parents: Drs. Valeria Tanco and Sophy Jesty, veterinarians with one child, and Matthew Mansell and Johno Espejo, who are raising two kids.
In the Kentucky case, two of the six plaintiff couples have children. Michael De Leon is the only legal adoptive parent of the children he is raising with Gregory Bourke. Randell Johnson is the only legal adoptive parent of the three sons he is raising with Paul Campion, who in turn is the only adoptive parent of their daughter.
In the Michigan case, plaintiffs April DeBoer and Jayne Rowse originally began their lawsuit not to marry, but to secure joint adoption rights of their three children, whom they had adopted separately.
Here they are at a press conference after learning the U.S. Supreme Court had taken the case. At 10:30 in the video, DeBoer talks about how “the kids all ran around the house screaming” when the news came in. At about 11:30, Rowse answers a question about whether she thinks her kids will look back on what their parents did and be proud of them.
Parenthood is not the only reason to marry, nor should marriage be necessary for parental rights. (It’s not necessary for different-sex couples.) And marriage is far from the only issue in LGBTQ equality. Marriage is a societal touchstone, however, weighted with meaning for adults and children alike. We are right to acknowledge the significance of standing before the Supreme Court to argue our right to marry.
No longer are we arguing simply that LGBTQ equality won’t harm children; we are arguing that it will help them.
As I’ve said before, too, the fact that children are featuring so prominently in marriage cases says much about the progress the LGBTQ equality movement has made. No longer are we arguing simply that LGBTQ equality won’t harm children; we are arguing that it will help them. Let’s hope the Supreme Court continues to agree with us, as it did in its 2013 Windsor decision.