Q&A: Jim Obergefell fears for marriage equality future under Trump

On June 26, the United States will mark 10 years since the Supreme Court issued a landmark ruling in favour of Jim Obergefell, legalising same-sex marriage across the country.    

Obergefell filed the lawsuit against the governor of Ohio in July 2013, eight days after marrying his long-term partner John Arthur, who was battling amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), in Maryland, where same-sex marriage was legal.

Ohio did not recognise the couple's marriage, and they decided to go to court after realising Arthur would be recorded as "unmarried" on his death certificate.

Arthur died in October 2013.

Context spoke with Obergefell about his husband's legacy and his worries for the future.

When did you and John decide to marry?

The third time we met was at John's New Year's Eve party, 1992 into 1993. I was 26, he was 27. I told him the next day I wanted to be a couple. I just knew he was special, and I wanted him in my life.

Within two years we talked about marriage. Not just a symbolic ceremony, we wanted everything it means to anyone who hears that term. But we thought we'd never have the possibility.

In 2013, John had started at-home hospice care. On June 26, 2013, we learned the Supreme Court had struck down the Federal Defense of Marriage Act.

That was the federal law that defined marriages as between one man and one woman. I realised this was our opportunity to have at least the federal government see us like a married couple. So I spontaneously proposed, and luckily John said yes.

We lived in Ohio, with its own state-level Defense of Marriage Act. So through the generosity of our family and friends, we chartered a medical jet and flew to Baltimore/Washington International Airport. We landed, parked on the tarmac, and I got to take John's hand and say I do.

What was John like?

He was an incredibly charming, generous, very funny man. He had such a sharp wit. To meet John - you loved John. He never knew a stranger. When he was diagnosed, we knew his life was coming to an end sooner rather than later, so I looked at every day I had with him as a gift.

It was really difficult after he died, I was grieving. But continuing the fight was an easy decision, because I was living up to my promises to John. No matter how hard it was to lose him, I got to talk about him every single day.

It kept him alive. Not everyone who dies leaves a legacy (like the one) that John is part of.

How did it feel to hear the ruling?

There were countless people in that courtroom who just burst into tears, people were sobbing. Not surprisingly, my immediate thought was, 'John, I wish you were here. I wish you could experience this, and I wish you could know our marriage can never be erased.

But then what I wasn't expecting was to realise I felt, for the first time as an out gay man, like an equal American. That was such an unexpected feeling.

What is your outlook on the state of marriage equality now?

I'm worried about this decision remaining intact. There are two Supreme Court justices who have said point blank they want to overturn Obergefell. There are state legislatures that have passed resolutions calling to overturn it. There is a major religious organisation that has now voted to ban marriage equality again.

The Supreme Court has proven that they do not care about precedent. They overturned the right to an abortion, and that was precedent for 49 years.

A big part of what's behind this is our president. He has emboldened people to be proud of the hate they have for others. There are certain faith leaders and organisations too, pushing this false narrative that their interpretation of faith is more important than anything else, including other people's civil rights.

Trump will get behind whatever voices are cheering him on the most. So if that's people who are completely against marriage equality, he will be too to have their support.

All we can do is use our voices in any way that works: contacting elected officials, engaging in protests, testifying in state houses, in board meetings and, most importantly, at the ballot box.

This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

(Reporting by Lucy Middleton; Editing by Ayla Jean Yackley)