In a recent Supreme Court ruling, citizens were found to lack a “fundamental liberty interest” in bringing noncitizen spouses to the United States, igniting concerns about broader implications for marriage rights, particularly for same-sex couples. The decision, which saw conservative justices in the majority, prompted a fervent dissent from Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who cautioned that this ruling could erode established marriage protections.
The case, Department of State v. Muñoz, involved Sandra Muñoz, an American citizen, and her husband, Luis Asencio-Cordero of El Salvador. After their visa application was denied due to suspicions of gang affiliation—later debunked—Muñoz sued the State Department, claiming a violation of her constitutional rights. The Ninth Circuit initially sided with Muñoz, recognizing her protected liberty interest. However, the Supreme Court reversed this decision, asserting that such matters fall under the executive branch’s discretion.
Justice Sotomayor, in her dissent, invoked the landmark Obergefell v. Hodges ruling, which established the right to same-sex marriage. She argued that the exclusion of a citizen’s spouse undermines this right and necessitates a factual basis from the government. Sotomayor warned that the majority’s ruling paves the way for arbitrary denials and could force same-sex couples to relocate to countries with hostile laws.
The potential ripple effects of this decision extend beyond immigration issues. Similar to the court’s 2022 decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which overturned Roe v. Wade, this ruling demands a precise description of fundamental liberties, raising fears about the security of marriage equality.