More than a decade after the U.S. Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriage nationwide, a Texas jury has reignited the national debate over religious liberty and the obligations of public officials. Conservative legal advocates said the winning decision in the controversial case of a Justice of the Peace in Texas may serve as the groundwork to help overturn the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Obergefell vs Hodges, a landmark decision allowing same-sex marriage in the United States.
Last month on June 24, a jury awarded a whopping $640,000 to McLennan County (JP) Justice of the Peace Dianne Hensley. Hensley argued she was forced to abandon her elected position because she refused to officiate same-sex weddings. The verdict has drawn national attention as supporters hailed the court decision as a moral victory for religious freedom, while critics contend it raises difficult questions about the responsibilities of government officials. A breakdown of the judgement awarded Hensley added up to $10,000 in compensatory damages and $630,000 in attorney’s fees. In an interview with KERA News, Hensley said she feels her case has protected Texas judges’ religious liberty rights.
Travis County Judge Maya Guerra Gamble ruled the State Commission on Judicial Conduct cannot investigate, sanction or discipline JP Hensley for refusing to officiate same-sex weddings because of her Christian beliefs, regardless of whether she continues performing marriage for opposite-sex couples.
“I think the agency overstepped itself, and what we saw was their bias on the issue and not the law,” Hensley stated to a KERA News reporter.
The Hensley decision, the first of its kind, also adds another written chapter to the continuing legal struggle over whether courts should draw the line between First Amendment protections when citizens exercise religion and the government’s obligation to provide equal access to public services.
Civil rights advocates, however, have long insisted that public officials who voluntarily serve in government must carry out the duties of their office without discriminating against citizens based on sexual orientation. From that perspective, refusing to perform marriages for same-sex couples amounts to unequal treatment under the law.
Will Hensley’s Legal Victory Jeopardize Obergefell vs Hodges?
The impact of the moral dispute traces its roots to the U.S. Supreme Court’s – 2015 decision in Obergefell v. Hodges, a same-sex marriage contested battle, heavily supported by the previous Obama administration. In Obergefell v Hodges the supreme court decision held that same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry. Such a ruling required every state to recognize and license same-sex marriages which fundamentally changed the historical landscape of marriage laws across the country.
For all Texas Justices of the Peace, the decision created a direct conflict between constitutional law and deeply held religious beliefs. Hensley, a staunch follower and believer in the bibilical words of Christ still remain committed to not perform same-sex marriage ceremonies, arguing that doing so violated her Christian faith.
What pivot in Hensley’s favor was the undeniable fact Texas judges and justices of the peace are allowed but aren’t required to preside over weddings. Following the landmark U.S. Supreme Court case in the 2015 legalized gay marriage decision involving Obergefell v. Hodges some judicial officers chose to either officiate both gay and straight marriages or refused to marry anyone.
Citing her Christianity, Hensley, realizing the Supreme Court decision in Oberfell v Hodges, a decision allowing gay marriages, had, to a larger extent tied her hands, so she temporarily chose not to officiate any weddings. Subsequently, later on Hensley decided to restart performing weddings in 2016 for straight couples only. According to court filings, she referred same-sex couples to a different judge and other nearby officiants.
Hensley told the Waco Tribune-Herald of her decision in a 2017 news media interview. Once the judicial conduct commission learned about this, the commission launched an inquiry into Hensley’s policy in 2018 and issued a public warning to JP Hensley the next year. A public warning is a serious conduct sanction issued by the commission. Hensley struck another target when she boldly sued the commission over the discipline instead of pursuing an administrative appeal. She argued her actions were protected by the Texas Religious Freedom Restoration Act. The law prohibits the government from making restrictions that substantially burden someone’s freedom of religion.
“People cannot be made – cannot be forced into participating in things that they have a religious disagreement with,” said attorney Hiram Sasser with the First Liberty Institute, the conservative public interest law firm that served as part of the defense team representing Hensley in court.
Under Trump Administration, Gay Culture & Same Sex Marriages Facing Obstacles
During Trump’s first day in office as the new president on January 20, 2025, he issued an executive order stating, “It is the policy of the United States to recognize two sexes, male and female” Shortly after, Pentagon officials prohibited transgender individuals from openly serving in the military, and Trump prohibited trans women from competing in female sports.
Then, there was more. Philadelphia’s Independence Hall, a landmark location featuring many of the first gay rights demonstrations, ordered the U.S. Park to remove LGBTQ references. Having to suffer these setbacks the LGBTQ community lost almost a billion dollars in grants. Trump Administration closed a national suicide hotline for LGBTQ adolescents and canceled $800 million in grants for LGBTQ health research.
The Respect for Marriage Act (RFMA), which was passed by the US Congress in 2022 with widespread bipartisan support included same-sex marriages. However, these safeguards doesn’t thwart the Republican agenda to eliminate same-sex marriage once and for all. Americans’ support for gay marriage is declining rather than rising, according to an article in Time Magazine. In May, 2025, 69% of people supported gay marriage, which is less than the 71% who did so in 2022 and 2023. The support for homosexual marriage has decreased by 14 points since 2022, and the majority of Republicans are reviving their opposition against it.
Same-sex marriage in the Supreme Court controversial decision involving the Obergefell vs Hodges was not codified into law by the RFMA, despite popular belief of those dedicated to following the ruling. By repealing the infamous Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which passed in 1996 at the height of the moral panic about homosexual marriage fanned by the Christian right, RFMA essentially permits federal recognition of gay marriage. Even if the marriage took place in a state where it was legal, DOMA forbids federal recognition of homosexual unions.
Texas Supreme Court Ruling Greenlit Hensley’s Lawsuit Despite She Hadn’t Exhausted All Options
The Texas Supreme Court ruled in 2024, JP Dianne Hensley had grounds to proceed with her suit even if she didn’t first exhaust her administrative options, but justices didn’t rule on her religious freedom claims. Later, the commission dismissed Hensley’s sanction a few months after the Texas Supreme Court’s decision in 2024. According to news media outlets, the agency’s officials admitted no commissioners were present at the agency when it reprimanded Hensley. Realizing an error was made the commission withdrew the sanction after reviewing the underlying facts.
Meanwhile, at the time, Austin’s Third Court of Appeals threw Hensley and her attorneys a lifeline when the appellate judges sided with Hensley last May in 2025, thus allowing the case to move forward into Travis County District Court.
Lawsuit Forced Texas Supreme Court to Change Rules on Judicial Impartiality
Hensley’s lawsuit prompted the Texas Supreme Court to amend state rules on judicial impartiality. This past October the court clarified judges who decline to perform a wedding ceremony based on a “sincerely held religious belief” won’t violate the state’s rules on judicial impartiality. A similar lawsuit entered the fray when a Jack County Justice of the Peace lawsuit filed by Judge Brian Umphress. To gain leverage, Umphress sued the commission, alleging he was afraid he may face the same punishment as Hensley if he refused to officate a same-sex marriage. Texas high court justices ruled in January, indicating Umphress wouldn’t face discipline for his choice not to marry gay couples.
JP Hensley Attack Landmark Same-Sex Marriage Law While Tarrant County JPs’ File Class Action Lawsuit
JP Hensley went a big step further when she asked federal courts in December to overturn Obergefell altogether. The ongoing lawsuit argues the federal judiciary “has no authority to recognize or invent ‘fundamental’ constitutional rights.”
In Tarrant, County, Texas, a class-action lawsuit was filed against the State Commission on Judicial Conduct on behalf of justices of the peace who refused to perform same-sex marriages and completely stopped doing so to avoid disciplinary penalties. Other JP justices are spearheading the class action, which aims to sue the commission for damages under the Texas Religious Freedom Restoration Act.
Hensley stated that other judges in McLennan County, Texas are happy to marry gay couples, therefore she doesn’t think her case will have a severe impact. She stated she never wanted to officiate weddings in the first place, therefore, she’s not sure if she’ll start doing weddings again.
“I was just accommodating people who called needing a low-cost wedding, and it’s been long enough now we don’t get many calls anymore,” Hensley said. “So, unless we start getting a lot of demand, I may not.” Despite the legal consequences, Hensley maintained her position with unwavering conviction.
Conclusion
Supporters against same-sex marriages have argued for several years, that although the Supreme Court’s ruling legalized same-sex marriage but the ruling did not require every judge or Justice of the Peace to personally officiate such ceremonies. They contend that government officials should not be compelled to participate in ceremonies that conflict with their religious beliefs, particularly when other receptive judges are available to perform the marriages.
More broadly, the case illustrates that the legal and cultural battles sparked by Obergefell v. Hodges remain unresolved. Although same-sex marriage has been constitutionally protected for more than a decade, courts across the country continue to confront disputes involving religious accommodations, free speech, and the rights of public officials.
As similar conflicts emerge, judges will likely continue defining the boundaries between religious liberty and public duty-an area of constitutional law that remains one of the nation’s most closely watched legal battlegrounds.
C. Walker is a Houston-Texas based reporter, journalist and editor at HoustonNewsToday.com He Can Be Reached at Houstonnewstoday@yahoo.com
