The scope of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution has been discussed at length since its adoption in the mid-1800s. Landmark cases such as Brown v. Board of Education and Roe v. Wade were made possible by the amendment mentioned. These past cases not only show the progression of American society, but also highlight the degree of versatility contained in the amendment. Now, in 2015, the concerns are no longer about racial segregation or abortion, the scope of the amendment has been extended to a new area: same-sex marriage. In Obergefell v. Hodges, we can see the epitome of the Equal Protection Clause. For some context, this case came to the Supreme Court as several groups of same-sex couples from different states sued state agencies when recognition of their marriage was denied. . As appeals mounted, plaintiffs argued that states were violating the Equal Protection Clause and Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Equal protection, according to the Constitution, refers to the fact that “any State [shall not] deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law…” (23). The opposition in this case was that 1) the Constitution does not address same-sex marriage as a policy, and 2) state sovereignty regarding the decision. Ultimately, and according to the Oyez Project, the Court held that "[the Amendment] guarantees the right to marriage as one of the fundamental freedoms it protects, and that this analysis applies to couples equally sex”, and therefore to homosexual marriage. is a fundamental freedom. The opposing argument provides a perfect gateway to the topic of federal-state relations. In the United States, the Supremacy Clause serves... middle of paper... freedoms so inflicted on one person to another seems like an unnecessary loop. The government is supposed to provide for the people, and the Fourteenth Amendment is so universal that, even when it was drafted in the 1860s, it served as a cornerstone for some of the most important cases in state history -United. was a perfect interpretation of the Constitution. Although the opposition claims that these rights are not addressed in the Constitution, too few rights are addressed in the United States Constitution. This is why there is something called judicial review. Using judicial review, the interpreters of the law – the Supreme Court – can make changes to policies and laws. Abortion, medicinal marijuana and marriage fall under equal protection since they correspond to the rights and freedoms of American citizens..