In a treasured 2015 photo, attorney Ken Mogill (top right) was among the celebrants at the wedding of April DeBoer and Jayne Rowse, a ceremony performed by U.S. District Judge Bernard Friedman (lower right). Others pictured in the top row are Robert Sedler, Carole Stanyar, and Dana Nessel. Pictured in the front, far left, is Mary Bonauto, who argued the case for the plaintiffs in the Supreme Court and had earlier argued a groundbreaking marriage equality case before the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court.
Photo courtesy of Ken Mogill
Photo courtesy of Ken Mogill
By Tom Kirvan
Legal News
In 2025, upon the 10th anniversary of the landmark case Obergefell v. Hodges that made same-sex marriages legal in America, Ken Mogill, one of the attorneys for the Michigan plaintiffs in the case, reflected on the 2015 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that has become among the most transformative chapters in the history of human rights.
Mogill, who since 2002 has been an adjunct professor at Wayne State University Law School, penned a “Point of View” article on the case and the long struggle for marriage equality, a legal and social movement that fundamentally redefined dignity and equal protection under the law.
His article, which appeared in the Wayne Lawyer magazine, offered a riveting account of the legal battle that involved several other members of the Wayne State community – attorney Dana Nessel, a 1994 alumna of the law school who is finishing her second term as Michigan’s Attorney General, and renowned constitutional law professor Robert Sedler, who passed away in January 2025 at the age of 89.
“Without Dana there wouldn’t have been the case to begin with,” Mogill said emphatically. “She was the driving force behind getting it going and doing so much throughout the case to educate people to the issues in the case.”
Wayne Law Professor Sedler also played a pivotal role in developing a legal strategy in the case, based in part on having “written a prescient 2003 law review article that laws prohibiting same-sex couples from marrying were unconstitutional,” Mogill indicated.
In addition, Ann Arbor attorney Carole Stanyar was part of the legal team assembled by Nessel. A Yale University grad who earned her juris doctor from Boston College Law, Stanyar is an “accomplished litigator and appellate lawyer” who had prior U. S. Supreme Court experience to her credit, according to Mogill.
Mogill, of course, also had a front-row seat to the proceedings, joining Nessel, Sedler, and Stanyar as lawyers for the plaintiffs in the Michigan marriage equality case.
The legal journey, Mogill explained, began not as a sweeping constitutional challenge to the institution of marriage, but instead as a deeply personal quest for family security. In 2011, April DeBoer and Jayne Rowse, two nurses living together in Hazel Park, were raising three adopted children, two of whom had special needs.
Since Michigan law banned unmarried couples from jointly adopting, each child could only be legally adopted by one parent, the legal team explained. If something happened to the legal parent, the other would have no custody rights, leaving the children vulnerable to being separated by the foster care system, he indicated. Desperate to protect their family, the couple sought legal counsel.
Originally, the lawsuit targeted only Michigan’s restrictive adoption law, Mogill indicated. However, during a pivotal motion hearing, U.S. District Judge Bernard Friedman posed a striking question to Stanyar, who was arguing the motion for the legal team:
“Aren’t you really challenging the marriage amendment,” Judge Friedman asked, practically inviting them to amend their complaint to bring the state’s constitutional ban of same-sex marriage into play.
“This was a ‘now-what-do-we-do’ moment,” Mogill wrote in the Wayne Lawyer article. “The judge had thrown cold water on our argument but offered a lifeline. We were terrified that if we challenged the marriage amendment prematurely and lost, we would set back the struggle for marriage equality nationally. But what about April and Jayne’s children? We amended the complaint.”
The case then shifted into a direct challenge against Michigan’s 2004 voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage. The federal trial that followed in 2014 proved historic, becoming one of the only marriage equality cases nationwide to feature a full evidentiary trial examining the sociological and psychological realities of same-sex parenting. The state, according to Mogill, argued strongly that traditional marriage structures were necessary for child-rearing and that the will of the state’s voters should be upheld.
Legal News
In 2025, upon the 10th anniversary of the landmark case Obergefell v. Hodges that made same-sex marriages legal in America, Ken Mogill, one of the attorneys for the Michigan plaintiffs in the case, reflected on the 2015 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that has become among the most transformative chapters in the history of human rights.
Mogill, who since 2002 has been an adjunct professor at Wayne State University Law School, penned a “Point of View” article on the case and the long struggle for marriage equality, a legal and social movement that fundamentally redefined dignity and equal protection under the law.
His article, which appeared in the Wayne Lawyer magazine, offered a riveting account of the legal battle that involved several other members of the Wayne State community – attorney Dana Nessel, a 1994 alumna of the law school who is finishing her second term as Michigan’s Attorney General, and renowned constitutional law professor Robert Sedler, who passed away in January 2025 at the age of 89.
“Without Dana there wouldn’t have been the case to begin with,” Mogill said emphatically. “She was the driving force behind getting it going and doing so much throughout the case to educate people to the issues in the case.”
Wayne Law Professor Sedler also played a pivotal role in developing a legal strategy in the case, based in part on having “written a prescient 2003 law review article that laws prohibiting same-sex couples from marrying were unconstitutional,” Mogill indicated.
In addition, Ann Arbor attorney Carole Stanyar was part of the legal team assembled by Nessel. A Yale University grad who earned her juris doctor from Boston College Law, Stanyar is an “accomplished litigator and appellate lawyer” who had prior U. S. Supreme Court experience to her credit, according to Mogill.
Mogill, of course, also had a front-row seat to the proceedings, joining Nessel, Sedler, and Stanyar as lawyers for the plaintiffs in the Michigan marriage equality case.
The legal journey, Mogill explained, began not as a sweeping constitutional challenge to the institution of marriage, but instead as a deeply personal quest for family security. In 2011, April DeBoer and Jayne Rowse, two nurses living together in Hazel Park, were raising three adopted children, two of whom had special needs.
Since Michigan law banned unmarried couples from jointly adopting, each child could only be legally adopted by one parent, the legal team explained. If something happened to the legal parent, the other would have no custody rights, leaving the children vulnerable to being separated by the foster care system, he indicated. Desperate to protect their family, the couple sought legal counsel.
Originally, the lawsuit targeted only Michigan’s restrictive adoption law, Mogill indicated. However, during a pivotal motion hearing, U.S. District Judge Bernard Friedman posed a striking question to Stanyar, who was arguing the motion for the legal team:
“Aren’t you really challenging the marriage amendment,” Judge Friedman asked, practically inviting them to amend their complaint to bring the state’s constitutional ban of same-sex marriage into play.
“This was a ‘now-what-do-we-do’ moment,” Mogill wrote in the Wayne Lawyer article. “The judge had thrown cold water on our argument but offered a lifeline. We were terrified that if we challenged the marriage amendment prematurely and lost, we would set back the struggle for marriage equality nationally. But what about April and Jayne’s children? We amended the complaint.”
The case then shifted into a direct challenge against Michigan’s 2004 voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage. The federal trial that followed in 2014 proved historic, becoming one of the only marriage equality cases nationwide to feature a full evidentiary trial examining the sociological and psychological realities of same-sex parenting. The state, according to Mogill, argued strongly that traditional marriage structures were necessary for child-rearing and that the will of the state’s voters should be upheld.
During closing arguments, Mogill delivered an impassioned defense of human dignity.
“There is a well-emerged awareness that denial of the right to marry is a form of discrimination that our society can no longer tolerate,” Mogill stated firmly to the court, emphasizing that fundamental constitutional rights are designed to protect minorities from the overreach of majorities.
As a matter of modern law, Mogill argued, marriage had evolved into a gender-neutral institution grounded in love, mutual commitment, and equal protection.
“Thinking about what makes marriage fundamental led me to reflect on my own marriage,” Mogill wrote in the Wayne Lawyer article. “My parents had wanted me to marry a ‘nice Jewish girl.’ Instead, I married Maureen Shaughnessy, a wonderful Irish Catholic woman. Unlike April and Jayne, no one told us our different religious backgrounds barred marriage. Our right to marry didn’t depend on children, adoption, parenting skills, cohabitation, or even love. Stripped of cultural and religious practices, marriage is a civil contract that doesn’t distinguish rights or duties based on gender.”
Judge Friedman agreed, striking down Michigan’s marriage ban. Though the state immediately appealed and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit later reversed the trial court decision on a 2-1 vote, the groundwork had been laid. The Michigan case, DeBoer v. Snyder, was consolidated with similar challenges from Ohio, Kentucky, and Tennessee, ascending to the highest court in the land as companion cases to Obergefell v. Hodges.
On June 26, 2015, the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that the 14th Amendment guarantees same-sex couples the fundamental right to marry across all 50 states. The impact, said Mogill, was staggering, as instantly millions of LGBTQ+ Americans were granted the same legal protections, tax benefits, inheritance rights, and social recognition long afforded to heterosexual couples. More importantly, according to Mogill, it erased the state-sanctioned stigma that labeled their relationships and families as lesser.
By the time the case ended, the Michigan plaintiffs, April and Jayne, had adopted two more children. Mogill’s own family also was “touched” by the Supreme Court decision.
“Our youngest daughter and oldest grandson came out, married, and celebrated without an asterisk – in each case their celebration was ‘just’ a wedding,” Mogill said.
“Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. said, ‘The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.’ On June 26, 2015, the arc became a rainbow,” Mogill declared.
Photo courtesy of Ken Mogill
In a treasured 2015 photo, attorney Ken Mogill (top right) was among the celebrants at the wedding of April DeBoer and Jayne Rowse, a ceremony performed by U.S. District Judge Bernard Friedman (lower right). Others pictured in the top row are Robert Sedler, Carole Stanyar, and Dana Nessel. Pictured in the front, far left, is Mary Bonauto, who argued the case for the plaintiffs in the Supreme Court and had earlier argued a groundbreaking marriage equality case before the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court.
“There is a well-emerged awareness that denial of the right to marry is a form of discrimination that our society can no longer tolerate,” Mogill stated firmly to the court, emphasizing that fundamental constitutional rights are designed to protect minorities from the overreach of majorities.
As a matter of modern law, Mogill argued, marriage had evolved into a gender-neutral institution grounded in love, mutual commitment, and equal protection.
“Thinking about what makes marriage fundamental led me to reflect on my own marriage,” Mogill wrote in the Wayne Lawyer article. “My parents had wanted me to marry a ‘nice Jewish girl.’ Instead, I married Maureen Shaughnessy, a wonderful Irish Catholic woman. Unlike April and Jayne, no one told us our different religious backgrounds barred marriage. Our right to marry didn’t depend on children, adoption, parenting skills, cohabitation, or even love. Stripped of cultural and religious practices, marriage is a civil contract that doesn’t distinguish rights or duties based on gender.”
Judge Friedman agreed, striking down Michigan’s marriage ban. Though the state immediately appealed and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit later reversed the trial court decision on a 2-1 vote, the groundwork had been laid. The Michigan case, DeBoer v. Snyder, was consolidated with similar challenges from Ohio, Kentucky, and Tennessee, ascending to the highest court in the land as companion cases to Obergefell v. Hodges.
On June 26, 2015, the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that the 14th Amendment guarantees same-sex couples the fundamental right to marry across all 50 states. The impact, said Mogill, was staggering, as instantly millions of LGBTQ+ Americans were granted the same legal protections, tax benefits, inheritance rights, and social recognition long afforded to heterosexual couples. More importantly, according to Mogill, it erased the state-sanctioned stigma that labeled their relationships and families as lesser.
By the time the case ended, the Michigan plaintiffs, April and Jayne, had adopted two more children. Mogill’s own family also was “touched” by the Supreme Court decision.
“Our youngest daughter and oldest grandson came out, married, and celebrated without an asterisk – in each case their celebration was ‘just’ a wedding,” Mogill said.
“Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. said, ‘The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.’ On June 26, 2015, the arc became a rainbow,” Mogill declared.
Photo courtesy of Ken Mogill
In a treasured 2015 photo, attorney Ken Mogill (top right) was among the celebrants at the wedding of April DeBoer and Jayne Rowse, a ceremony performed by U.S. District Judge Bernard Friedman (lower right). Others pictured in the top row are Robert Sedler, Carole Stanyar, and Dana Nessel. Pictured in the front, far left, is Mary Bonauto, who argued the case for the plaintiffs in the Supreme Court and had earlier argued a groundbreaking marriage equality case before the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court.
––––––––––––––––––––
Subscribe to the Legal News!
https://www.legalnews.com/Home/Subscription
Full access to public notices, articles, columns, archives, statistics, calendar and more
Day Pass Only $4.95!
One-County $80/year
Three-County & Full Pass also available
