Texas Supreme Court Rules Judges Can Refuse to Officiate Same-Sex Marriages, Citing Religious Beliefs

The Texas Supreme Court has amended the Texas Code of Judicial Conduct to clarify that state judges may refuse to officiate at weddings—including those of same-sex couples—if doing so conflicts with their sincerely held religious beliefs . The ruling, signed on October 24, 2025, marks a significant shift in judicial guidelines, and takes effect immediately.

The amended comment to Canon 4 of the Texas Code of Judicial Conduct now states: “It is not a violation of these canons for a judge to publicly refrain from performing a wedding ceremony based upon a sincerely held religious belief” . This change follows a years-long debate and litigation over whether Texas judges, who are often authorized but not required to perform wedding ceremonies, must do so for all couples regardless of sexual orientation.

The Texas Supreme Court’s decision arrives at a time of heightened legal uncertainty for LGBTQ+ rights nationwide. Same-sex marriage has been legal in Texas since the landmark 2015 United States Supreme Court decision in Obergefell v. Hodges, which affirmed marriage equality across all states . However, the new Texas ruling highlights ongoing tensions between religious liberty claims and equal access to public services.

The immediate catalyst for the court’s action was a protracted legal dispute involving a Texas judge who sought a religious exemption after being disciplined for declining to officiate same-sex weddings . The issue escalated earlier this year when the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals asked the Texas Supreme Court to clarify whether judges who refuse to marry same-sex couples, but continue to wed opposite-sex couples, violate judicial impartiality standards .

The court’s new rule means judges who decline to perform marriages for LGBTQ+ couples based on religious beliefs will not face disciplinary action under the state’s judicial conduct code . While the text of the amendment does not expressly reference same-sex couples, its context and the legal history clearly link the change to ongoing controversies over marriage equality.

Advocacy groups and legal experts warn that the ruling could subject same-sex couples in Texas to selective treatment and practical barriers when seeking to formalize their unions in court . According to 2022 U.S. Census data, Texas is home to more than 100,000 same-sex couple households, with over half of those couples married . LGBTQ+ advocates emphasize that the ability to access marriage on equal terms is not only a matter of dignity, but also critical for legal and financial protections.

The First Liberty Institute, a conservative legal nonprofit that represented the judge at the center of the dispute, celebrated the court’s clarification. “Now going forward, every judge in Texas will enjoy the freedom Judge Hensley has fought so hard for in her case,” said Hiram Sasser, Executive General Counsel of the organization .

The Texas ruling comes as the U.S. Supreme Court is being asked to revisit the scope of marriage equality. A case involving Kim Davis, a Kentucky county clerk who refused to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, is currently pending before the high court, with a decision on whether to hear the case expected in early November 2025 .

If the Supreme Court were to overturn Obergefell v. Hodges, existing same-sex marriages would remain valid under the federal Respect for Marriage Act of 2022, which requires states to recognize marriages performed elsewhere . However, state-level rules like Texas’s new judicial conduct amendment could further complicate the landscape for LGBTQ+ couples seeking to marry in their home communities.

LGBTQ+ advocacy organizations have expressed deep concern over the decision, warning that it could set a dangerous precedent for religious exemptions in public service roles. Many advocates argue that the ruling effectively sanctions discrimination under the guise of religious liberty, and undermines the promise of equal treatment established by Obergefell .

Equality Texas, the state’s largest LGBTQ+ advocacy group, reiterated its commitment to challenging policies that restrict the rights of LGBTQ+ Texans to access government services without prejudice. “No couple should have to worry that a judge’s personal beliefs will prevent them from accessing the rights they are guaranteed under the law,” the group said in a public statement .

National organizations, including the Human Rights Campaign, echo concerns that such rulings encourage a patchwork of access to fundamental rights, depending on local officials’ personal views. They also highlight the psychological and social harm caused by policies that single out LGBTQ+ couples for differential treatment .

The Texas Supreme Court’s decision to allow judges to refuse to perform same-sex marriages on religious grounds underscores the ongoing challenges facing LGBTQ+ individuals and couples seeking equality. While marriage remains legal for same-sex couples in Texas and nationwide, the ruling raises pressing questions about the accessibility and universality of that right—especially in regions where judges may invoke religious beliefs to limit participation in state-sanctioned ceremonies .

As legal and cultural debates continue, LGBTQ+ advocates and allies are expected to monitor the implementation of the new rule closely, and to push for policies that ensure equal treatment and access for all Texans, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity.