Document Type
Article
Publication Date
2024
Abstract
In Supriyo v. Union of India, a five-judge bench of the Supreme Court declined to find that same-sex couples have a right to marry under India’s Constitution. The various opinions in the case repeatedly recognised and affirmed the dignity of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) people, but ultimately found that exclusion from civil marriage did not run afoul of constitutional guarantees. In this Essay, I examine the limited understanding of dignity employed by the bench in Supriyo, juxtaposing this with both domestic and comparative LGBTQ rights decisions that embraced a more substantive understanding of dignity. I argue that the concept of equal dignity, which is attentive to the stigmatic harm of exclusion, illustrates why exclusion from civil marriage jeopardises the rights of same-sex couples and offers important insights for lawmakers and judges considering relationship recognition for same-sex couples in the years ahead.
Recommended Citation
Ryan Thoreson, Dignity Deferred: Supriyo v. Union of India and LGBTQ Rights, 15 J. Indian L. & Soc'y. 1 (2024).