Mullinax v. Covington

On March 22, 2004, Richard Mullinax and Perry Pike, a same-sex couple from Durham, filed suit against county officials, arguing that the county must issue them a marriage license, even though state law forbade same-sex marriage. County officials filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit. The case was heard and dismissed without prejudice on May 10, 2004, by a district court judge.^[17]

Fisher-Borne v. Smith and Gerber v. Cooper

On June 13, 2012, six same-sex couples filed a federal lawsuit, Fisher-Borne v. Smith, that initially sought the right to obtain stepchild adoptions. In July 2013, following the June U.S. Supreme Court decision in United States v. Windsor, they amended their suit to challenge the constitutionality of the state's denial of marriage rights to same-sex couples.^[18] They were represented by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and private attorneys. Briefing was completed on August 13, 2014.^[19] Three same-sex couples filed Gerber v. Cooper in federal court in April 2014 seeking North Carolina's recognition of their marriages, which were established in other jurisdictions. They were represented by the ACLU and private attorneys. Briefing was completed on August 13, 2014.^[19] Proceedings in both cases were stayed pending the outcome of a Virginia case, Bostic v. Schaefer. The U.S. Supreme Court declined the appeal in that case on October 6, 2014, leaving the Fourth Circuit's decision, which found Virginia's ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional, as binding precedent on courts in North Carolina.^[20] On July 28, after the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals' ruling in Bostic, the North Carolina Attorney General, Roy Cooper, had announced that he would no longer defend the state's ban on same-sex marriage. He said that because all judges in North Carolina were bound by the Fourth Circuit's precedent, "today we know our law will almost surely be overturned as well. Simply put, it's time to stop making arguments we will lose and instead move forward knowing the ultimate resolution will likely come from the United States Supreme Court."^[21]

On October 8, 2014, Judge William Osteen of the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina lifted those stays and invited plaintiffs' attorneys to present the court with a motion to rule North Carolina's ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional.^[22] The plaintiffs in both cases filed a joint motion asking the court to issue such an order. They modeled their suggested language on the order issued in Bostic.^[23] On October 9, two leaders of the North Carolina General Assembly, Thom Tillis, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, and Phil Berger, the President pro tempore of the Senate, asked to be allowed to intervene to defend the state's ban.^[24] Their filing said: "This intervention is about ensuring that the choice made by North Carolina voters receives its day in Court." They contended that "because Bostic was based in part on outcome-determinative concessions made by the Virginia Attorney General that have not been made in this litigation, Bostic does not control." If the district court determined that Bostic controlled the decision in these cases, they proposed to pursue appeals of that judgment to the Fourth Circuit, the Fourth Circuit en banc, and the U.S. Supreme Court.^[25] On October 14, Judge Osteen allowed them to intervene solely to preserve their right to appeal.^[26] He ruled for the plaintiffs the same day. He found Bostic controlling since North Carolina's and Virginia's bans were virtually identical, held North Carolina's ban unconstitutional, and enjoined the state from enforcing its ban on same-sex marriage.^[27]

On December 16, the Fourth Circuit consolidated these cases and put proceedings on hold pending action by the U.S. Supreme Court on certiorari petitions in Obergefell v. Hodges and related cases. On January 14, 2015, Berger and Tillis petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to review the case without waiting for review by the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals.^[28] The Supreme Court ruled on June 26, 2015, that state same-sex marriage bans violate the Due Process and Equal Protection clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment. The decision legalized same-sex marriage nationwide in the United States. Lieutenant Governor Dan Forest condemned the court ruling, saying, "The power grab by a majority of the Supreme Court is a full-on assault on the founding principles of democratic process, federalism, separation of powers, the voice of the people and judicial restraint." Michael Francis Burbidge, the Roman Catholic Bishop of Raleigh, said, "The true definition of marriage cannot be redefined by courts. It remains the permanent union of one man and one woman, oriented to the procreation and raising of children. The Catholic Church, along with many other Christian and religious traditions, will continue our work with regard to this true definition of marriage and to strengthen the moral basis for all such relationships." The ACLU issued the following statement, "The Supreme Court today welcomed same-sex couples fully into the American family. Gay and lesbian couples and our families may be at peace knowing that our simple request to be treated like everyone else – that is, to be able to participate in the dignity of marriage – has finally been granted. Today's historic victory comes on the backs of same-sex couples and advocates who have worked for decades to dismantle harmful stereotypes and unjust laws in the quest for equal treatment." State Representative Larry Hall called it a "victory for equality", and the Mayor of Chapel Hill, Mark Kleinschmidt, called it "a great day for all Americans and for the promise of our democracy". David Price, representing North Carolina's 4th congressional district, said, "I join many of my constituents, some of whom have been waiting for this moment for a long time, in celebrating today's Supreme Court decision, which continues the remarkable progress we have made as a country toward equal rights for all Americans, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity. I am reminded this morning of the landmark cases of the Civil Rights era, when justice finally won out over long-standing prejudice."^[29]

General Synod of the United Church of Christ v. Cooper

On April 28, 2014, the United Church of Christ, joined by a coalition of Baptists, Lutherans, and Unitarian Universalists, filed a lawsuit,^[30] arguing that North Carolina's statute that made it a crime to preside at the solemnization of the marriage of a couple that lacked a valid state marriage license unconstitutionally restricted religious freedom.^[31][32] On June 3, 2014, additional national religious denominations and clergy were added as plaintiffs, including the Alliance of Baptists, the Association of Welcoming and Affirming Baptists, and the Central Conference of American Rabbis in addition to Episcopal, Jewish and Baptist clergy.^[33] Dr. Reverend Nancy Petty of the Pullen Memorial Baptist Church, a plaintiff in the case, said, "By preventing our same-sex congregants from forming their own families, the North Carolina ban on same-sex marriage burdens my ability and the ability of my congregation to form a faith community of our choosing consistent with the principles of our faith." Reverend Nancy Allison, a pastor of the Holy Covenant United Church of Christ and another plaintiff, said, "North Carolina judges some of its citizens as unfit for the blessings of God. We reject that notion. […] The sacraments of baptism and communion are open to all. So should all God's children be able to receive marriage." A spokesperson for the Roman Catholic Diocese of Charlotte condemned the lawsuit, saying "This lawsuit does not change the fact that God created men and women differently. The fruits of that difference are marriage and the continuance of the human race through children." Tami Fitzgerald, executive director of the North Carolina Values Coalition, a group that opposes same-sex marriage, said, "[I]t's both ironic and sad that an entire religious denomination and its clergy who purport holding to Christian teachings on marriage would look to the courts to justify their errant beliefs. These individuals are simply revisionists that distort the teaching of Scripture to justify sexual revolution, not marital sanctity." Paul Gallant, a commentator for The News & Observer, issued the following statement, "I find it interesting that right-wing Christians pushed this into law because [same-sex marriage is] ... against their religious beliefs and now left-wing Christians say the law violates their Christian beliefs. How about we leave marriage up to individuals and leave the government out of it? Less government! You would think right wingers would be all for this."^[34]

On October 7, the plaintiffs asked for an immediate injunction against the state, citing the Fourth Circuit's ruling in Bostic.^[35] On October 10, Judge Max O. Cogburn, Jr. of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of North Carolina denied a request by leaders of the General Assembly to be allowed to intervene to defend the state's ban and ruled the state's ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional.^[36][37] He wrote:^[38]

The issue before this court is neither a political issue nor a moral issue. It is legal issue, and it is clear as a matter of what is now settled law in the Fourth Circuit that North Carolina laws prohibiting same-sex marriage, refusing to recognize same-sex marriages originating elsewhere, and/or threatening to penalize those who would solemnize such marriages, are unconstitutional.

The decision legalized same-sex marriage in North Carolina with immediate effect. The first same-sex couple to marry in the state were Chad Biggs and Chris Creech in Raleigh on Friday, October 10.^[39] Chris Sgro, executive director of Equality North Carolina, said "Today's ruling allowing loving, same-sex couples to marry across North Carolina is a historic moment for our state. With it, we celebrate with so many North Carolinians who have worked tirelessly over decades to change hearts, minds, and unequal laws in the state we call home. Love won and the barriers to it are done."^[40] Governor Pat McCrory said "[his] administration is moving forward with the execution of the court's ruling." In Raleigh, Asheville and Greensboro, county offices stayed open late to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. Charlotte said it would open its office on Monday, October 13.

M.E. v. T.J.

In January 2021, the North Carolina Court of Appeals ruled in M.E. v. T.J. that the statute preventing judges from granting domestic violence protections to people in same-sex relationships was unconstitutional.^[41] The ruling was upheld by the North Carolina Supreme Court on March 11, 2022. North Carolina was the last remaining state in the country to deny certain domestic violence protections to same-sex partners.^[42]

Codification in state statutes

In order to abide by the legal precedent in General Synod of the United Church of Christ, HB 229, a bill to make technical corrections to state statutes as recommended by the General Statutes Commission was introduced to the General Assembly. The bill would amend the statute governing statutory construction to define the terms "husband and wife", "wife and husband", "man and wife", "woman and husband", "husband or wife", "wife or husband", "man or wife", "woman or husband", or "other terms suggesting two individuals who are then lawfully married to each other" as including "any two individuals who are then lawfully married to each other". The Senate passed the bill by a vote of 45 to 2 on June 26, 2017. The bill passed the House of Representatives by 116 votes to 1 the following day. It was signed into law by Governor McCrory on July 12, 2017, and went into effect that same day.^[43]

On May 7, 2019, SB 595, a bill to codify property laws such as tenancy by the entirety, on the recommendations of the North Carolina Bar Association, was introduced to the General Assembly. The bill would define "spouses" as "two individuals then legally married to each other" and replace the term "husband and wife" with "spouses". The bill passed the House on June 16, 2020, and the Senate on June 18 by 47 votes to 0. It was signed into law by Governor Roy Cooper on June 30, 2020, and went into effect that same day.^[44]

On May 5, 2023, SB 112, a bill to make technical corrections to the statutes concerning alimony and distribution of marital and divisible property in divorce proceedings, replacing the term "husband or wife" with "one or both spouses", passed the Senate by a vote of 50–0.^[45]

Religious exemption for magistrates

When the decision in General Synod took effect, state officials announced that judges were required to preside at marriage ceremonies for same-sex couples just as they would at those for different-sex couples and that a judge could not claim an exemption on religious grounds. By early November, six judges had resigned citing religious objections. A group of Republican legislators led by Senate President Phil Berger announced plans to sponsor legislation creating a religious exemption for state magistrates who object to participating at same-sex weddings on religious grounds. Such legislation passed the General Assembly in May 2015, though was vetoed by Governor McCrory. On June 3, 2015, the Senate successfully overrode McCrory's veto by a vote of 32–16, reaching the three-fifths majority needed for overriding a veto in the Senate.^[46] An override vote was held in the House of Representatives on June 11, 2015, achieving the three-fifths majority required by a margin of 69–41. As a result, the measure became law in North Carolina, which is just the second state after Utah to allow for this sort of religious exemption for state magistrates.^[47]

A lawsuit arguing that the exemption was unconstitutional was filed in federal court on December 9, 2015.^[48] On June 28, 2017, a three-judge panel of the Fourth Circuit, composed of J. Harvie Wilkinson III, Barbara Milano Keenan and Stephanie Thacker, dismissed the lawsuit because the couples who brought the suit lacked standing as none of them had been turned down by a state magistrate. At the time the lawsuit was filed, roughly 5 percent of magistrates were refusing to marry same-sex couples for religious reasons. This included every magistrate in McDowell County.^[49]

Attempt to pass unconstitutional legislation

On April 11, 2017, three Republicans legislators introduced the Uphold Historical Marriage Act to the General Assembly.^{[lower-alpha 1]} The bill sought to reenact the state's same-sex marriage ban, thus being in violation of Obergefell v. Hodges, the U.S. Supreme Court ruling which held that same-sex couples have a nationwide fundamental right to marry.^[50] The bill claimed the Supreme Court "overstepped its constitutional bounds". It also quoted the Bible, saying "the ruling exceeds the authority of the court relative to the decree of Almighty God that a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh".^[51][52] Governor Cooper subsequently announced his opposition to the bill, tweeting "We need more LGBT protections, not fewer." The following day, House Speaker Tim Moore denied the bill a hearing, effectively killing it. Moore said that "there are strong constitutional concerns with this legislation given that the U.S. Supreme Court has firmly ruled on the issue."^[53]