Divorcelaw Authority

Same-Sex Divorce Under U.S. Law Post-Obergefell

The 2015 Supreme Court ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges (576 U.S. 644) established marriage equality as a constitutional right under the Fourteenth Amendment, but equal access to marriage created a parallel and equally complex entitlement: equal access to divorce. Same-sex divorce in the United States operates under the same statutory frameworks governing opposite-sex dissolution, yet presents distinctive procedural and jurisdictional complications rooted in the pre-Obergefell period, when 37 states prohibited same-sex marriage. This page covers the legal definition of same-sex divorce under current U.S. law, the dissolution process, the most common factual scenarios that arise in practice, and the decision boundaries that shape outcomes across state lines.

Definition and Scope

Same-sex divorce is the legal dissolution of a marriage between two persons of the same sex, adjudicated under the same state family law codes that govern all civil marriages. Following Obergefell v. Hodges (Supreme Court, 2015), no state may refuse to recognize or dissolve a same-sex marriage solely on the basis of the spouses' sex. The Respect for Marriage Act of 2022 (Pub. L. 117-228) further codified federal recognition obligations, requiring states to give full faith and credit to same-sex marriages validly performed elsewhere.

Divorce jurisdiction requirements apply to same-sex couples identically to opposite-sex couples: a court must have subject-matter jurisdiction over the marriage and personal jurisdiction over at least one spouse. Because state family courts retain exclusive authority over marriage dissolution, federal vs. state divorce law dynamics are particularly significant here — federal courts do not dissolve marriages, but federal law governs whether states must recognize those marriages.

The scope of same-sex divorce encompasses:

How It Works

The procedural mechanics of same-sex divorce follow the standard dissolution framework. A petitioner files a divorce petition and response in the state where the residency requirement is satisfied. Residency requirements for divorce vary by state — ranging from 6 weeks in Nevada to 12 months in New York, Massachusetts, and Florida — and these requirements apply equally regardless of the spouses' sex.

The process moves through discrete phases:

  1. Filing and service — The petition is filed in the appropriate state court; the respondent spouse is formally served under that state's civil procedure rules.
  2. Jurisdiction confirmation — The court verifies residency, confirms the marriage is valid, and asserts subject-matter jurisdiction. For couples whose marriage was performed out of state, the court applies full faith and credit principles mandated by the Respect for Marriage Act.
  3. Temporary orders — The court may issue temporary orders in divorce covering property access, support, and parenting arrangements pending final judgment.
  4. Discovery and disclosure — Both parties exchange financial information under divorce financial disclosure requirements, including all assets accumulated during and, in some states, before the marriage.
  5. Property and support adjudication — Courts divide marital assets under the applicable state standard: community property in 9 states (including California, Texas, and Arizona) and equitable distribution in the remaining jurisdictions. Spousal support and alimony law applies without sex-based distinction.
  6. Parenting determinations — Where children are involved, courts apply the best interests of the child standard and establish parenting plans and custody agreements.
  7. Final decree — The court enters a divorce settlement agreement or trial judgment, formally dissolving the marriage.

The Uniform Law Commission's Uniform Divorce Recognition Act provides a model framework for how states should handle marriages and divorces originating elsewhere, though adoption by individual states varies.

Common Scenarios

Scenario 1: Marriage predates state legalization, couple resides in a formerly restrictive state. A couple married in Massachusetts in 2006 later relocated to a state that did not permit same-sex marriage until Obergefell. Post-2015, that state must dissolve the marriage as valid from its original date. The date of marriage governs the separate vs. marital property classification period — assets acquired from 2006 forward may be characterized as marital property, creating a longer marital estate than the couple's time in the current state.

Scenario 2: Civil union or domestic partnership, no subsequent marriage conversion. States including New Jersey and Illinois created civil unions before marriage equality. If a state did not automatically convert civil unions to marriages, a civil union may require separate dissolution proceedings distinct from a marriage dissolution. The legal distinction between civil union dissolution and divorce is governed by each state's domestic relations statutes, not federal law.

Scenario 3: Children with non-biological, non-adoptive parent. Where one spouse is a biological parent and the other did not adopt, courts apply parentage law — governed by the Uniform Parentage Act (2017 version, Uniform Law Commission) — to determine standing for custody and child support laws and guidelines. The Supreme Court addressed this in Pavan v. Smith (582 U.S. 563, 2017), holding states must treat same-sex spouses identically to opposite-sex spouses on birth certificates, a principle courts have applied in parentage disputes arising from divorce.

Scenario 4: International marriage, one spouse residing abroad. A marriage valid under a foreign country's law presents international divorce and U.S. jurisdiction complications. A U.S. state court can dissolve the marriage if it has personal jurisdiction over the domiciled spouse, but enforcing the decree abroad depends on the foreign jurisdiction's own recognition rules.

Decision Boundaries

Several factors determine procedural path and legal outcome in same-sex divorce cases.

Jurisdiction eligibility contrast — residency vs. place of celebration. Some states permit divorce only to residents; a same-sex couple who married in a state where they no longer reside must establish residency elsewhere before filing. This creates a practical disparity: opposite-sex couples rarely married in states where they never lived, but same-sex couples frequently traveled to Massachusetts, California, or Vermont to marry before local legalization. At minimum, 6 states and the District of Columbia enacted provisions allowing non-resident same-sex couples to divorce in the state of celebration if their home state would not dissolve the marriage — a carve-out now largely mooted by Obergefell but still relevant for foreign nationals whose home countries do not recognize the marriage.

Asset valuation date. In equitable distribution states, courts typically measure marital property from the date of marriage to the date of separation. For couples with pre-Obergefell marriages, this period can span more than a decade, producing larger marital estates and more complex marital property division calculations. QDRO retirement asset claims depend on this date calculation, as do divorce and Social Security benefit entitlements — the Social Security Administration requires 10 years of marriage for divorced-spouse benefit eligibility (SSA Program Operations Manual, RS 00202.005).

No-fault vs. fault grounds. Same-sex divorces, like all divorces, proceed under the applicable state's no-fault vs. fault divorce framework. All 50 states offer no-fault grounds. Fault-based grounds — adultery, abandonment, cruelty — remain available in 33 states and can affect alimony and property allocation in those jurisdictions, applied without sex-based distinction.

Contested vs. uncontested classification. The contested vs. uncontested divorce classification governs procedural timeline, cost, and the court's involvement level. Same-sex divorces involving disputes over parentage of non-biological children, long marital estate periods, or civil union conversion status are disproportionately likely to proceed as contested matters requiring judicial resolution rather than stipulated settlement.

Children's jurisdiction. Custody jurisdiction follows the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA), adopted in 49 states and the District of Columbia, which anchors jurisdiction to the child's home state — not the spouses' state of marriage or either parent's biological status.

References

On this site

Core Topics
Reference
Contact
Other Pages

In the network

Network