Desoyza 1

Anthony Desoyza
Professor Olivas
English 1A
31 January 2016
Rhetorical Analysis Essay
Justice Kennedy uses many forms of rhetoric to support his argument that same
sex marriage should be legal according to the 14 th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
He states, Under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, no state shall
deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law (Kennedy,
10). He takes advantage of many examples that utilize different forms of rhetoric,
including ethos, pathos, and logos, in order to convince the court of his purpose.
Appealing to the emotional, rational, and ethical aspects of the court, Justice Kennedy
amplifies the injustice of excluding same sex couples from what he deems as a
fundamental right protected by the U.S. Constitution. Being a judge on the Supreme
Court, he is well versed and has much knowledge in the history of our Nation and its
attitudes towards marriage and homosexuality. The rhetoric he uses to support his
purpose strengthen his argument in favor of same sex marriage.
Justice Kennedy does an impeccable job of using ethos to argue his purpose. In
the beginning of his deliverance of the courts opinion, Justice Kennedy expands upon
the idea and concept of marriage and what it has represented throughout history. He
stresses how sacred of an institution marriage is and what it means to those who are
fortunate enough to engage in it. In his words, Marriage is sacred to those who live by
their religions and offers unique fulfillment to those who find meaning in the secular

Desoyza 2
realm. Its dynamic allows two people to find a life that could not be found alone, for
marriage becomes greater than just the two persons. Rising from the most basic human
needs, marriage is essential to our most profound hopes and aspirations (3). I believe
that his knowledge and understanding of the concept of marriage gives him credibility
which in turn helps his argument.
There are many examples that Justice Kennedy uses that utilize pathos. He cites
the case of Obergefell v. Hodges in order empathize with a couple who had their
spousal rights taken away after one of the said couple passed away. In this case a
same sex couple, James Obergefell and John Arthur, were wed right before Arthur
passed away from a terminal illness. The two wanted to commit to one another before
Arthur passed in order to show their love for each other. Shortly after they were wed,
Arthur passed. In the state where they reside, Obergefell is not permitted to be listed as
the surviving spouse on Arthurs death certificate. Justice Kennedy states, By statute,
they must remain strangers even in death. This is a perfect example of how Justice
Kennedy uses emotional appeal to persuade the court in favor of his argument.
Using logos, he goes on delivering the opinion of the court expanding upon the
evolution of marriage and how its meaning has changed over time. He states, For
example, marriage was once viewed as an arrangement by the couples parents based
on political, religious, and financial concerns; but by the time of the Nations founding it
was understood to be a voluntary contract between a man and a woman (6). This
example shows how the institution of marriage is not something that has remained, or
needs to remain, stagnant. Rather, its a concept that evolves over time and experience
as our conscience as a nation expands. Why would something that has grown and

Desoyza 3
evolved into something much greater simply stop evolving now? It only makes sense
that as we learn more about humanity, so then do our laws and nature as a people
transform to fit that ever growing dynamic. At least, those were the thoughts that were
left in my mind after reading his words which is why I believe his use of logos only helps
his purpose.
Another perfect example of his utilization of logos is in his main argument.
Justice Kennedy clarifies that the right to marry for same sex couples is a fundamental
right protected by the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution which Grants citizenship
to all persons born or naturalized in the United States (LOC,1). It also, forbids states
from denying any person life, liberty or property, without the due process of law
(LOC,1), or to, deny to any person within its jurisdiction, the equal protection of the
laws (LOC,1). This by far, is his strongest argument and he uses logic to instill its
undeniable truth. Justice Kennedy states that the right to choose who we marry is part
of the liberty protected by the 14th Amendment. In addition these liberties extend to
certain personal choices central to individual dignity and autonomy, including intimate
choices that define personal identity and beliefs (Kennedy, 10), are the words he uses
to convey his argument. The picture he paints with these strong words is that there are
a group of people who are being denied fundamental rights that were guaranteed to
them by the U.S. Constitution. This argument is the one most difficult to contend with as
it is rooted in history and facts making his purpose seem ever more righteous which
makes it the perfect use of logos to support his argument.
Getting back to pathos, the last paragraph of his deliverance is by far the most
impactful and heartfelt. Using his words, It would misunderstand these men and

Desoyza 4
women to say they disrespect the idea of marriage. Their plea is that they do respect it,
respect it so deeply that they seek to find its fulfillment for themselves. Their hope is not
to be condemned to live in loneliness, excluded from one of civilizations oldest
institutions. They ask for equal dignity in the eyes of the law. The Constitution grants
them that right (28). This is the greatest piece of rhetoric in all of his deliverance in my
personal opinion. Not only does it make him seem more human, but it also shows
exactly what same sex couple have been fighting so diligently to gain. Equal dignity in
the eyes of the law. Its near impossible to argue with that statement. His use of pathos
drives the last nail in the coffin.
To conclude, Justice Kennedy is extremely talented when it comes to his use of
rhetoric to argue his purpose. Utilizing logos, ethos, and pathos, he clearly conveys the
struggle that is unconstitutionally forced on same sex couples. Using the 14 th
Amendment as a building block, he takes examples from Americas history, Americas
evolving conscience as a nation, and previous court cases to solidify a foundation and
make clear that same sex marriage is a fundamental right that is guaranteed to same
sex couples by the U.S. Constitution.