David Urban – Photo: American Battle Monuments Commission, Public Domain
David Urban, a Republican strategist and CNN commentator who served as a senior advisor to Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign, has written an op-ed accusing Democrats of fear-mongering for suggesting that the U.S. Supreme Court might overturn its 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges decision legalizing same-sex marriage.
In his USA Today op-ed, Urban accuses “hyperpartisan liberals” of trying to “sow fear and discontent” by suggesting that the Supreme Court could reverse its own precedent and strike down the 2015 ruling — a move that would immediately reinstate same-sex marriage bans still on the books in 32 states.
Urban specifically fixates on remarks made by former Secretary of State and 2016 Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton during an August appearance on the Raging Moderates podcast, hosted by Fox News’s Jessica Tarlov and entrepreneur Scott Galloway. In that interview, Clinton said she believed the high court would eventually hear a challenge to Obergefell and “do to gay marriage what they did to abortion — they will send it back to the states.”
“Anybody in a committed relationship out there in the LGBTQ community, you ought to consider getting married, because I don’t think they’ll undo existing marriages, but I fear they will undo the national right,” Clinton said.
Urban accuses Clinton of “spreading a fear that has no basis in law or politics,” and argues that the court will ultimately allow same-sex marriage to remain legal. He cites opinion polls and contends that most Republicans have lost the appetite to challenge marriage rights.
He points to a survey from Republican pollsters at Centerline America showing that more than three in five Americans — 61% — agree that same-sex couples should have the right to marry, with 15% remaining neutral. When respondents were pushed to choose, support rose to 72%, the figure Urban highlighted in his op-ed.
Urban also points out that 55% of Republicans approve of the Respect for Marriage Act. When forced to choose, 56% said same-sex couples should have the right to marry — compared to 40%, with 17% remaining “neutral,” when not forced to choose. He adds that 63% of respondents believe a Republican can support marriage equality and still be a Republican.
Notably, Urban omits a Gallup poll from earlier this year that tells a different story. That survey found only a minority of Republicans support same-sex marriage rights — part of a continuing decline in GOP backing over the past several years.
Urban also credits President Trump for refusing to continue the fight over same-sex marriage, arguing that Trump’s acknowledgment of such unions as valid has carried weight in conservative circles. He further praises both Trump and the Republican Party for removing language opposing same-sex marriage from the party’s 2024 platform.
“Americans have moved on, especially Republicans,” Urban writes, arguing that the fight over marriage equality is effectively settled. “Simply put, there is no appetite among voters or Republican leaders to overturn Obergefell. … The left should save its energy for debates that will have real consequences.”
Urban next points to former Kentucky county clerk Kim Davis’s appeal of a ruling against her and her legal team’s stated intent to challenge Obergefell, which he dismisses outright. But the Davis case is not viewed as a strong vehicle for overturning Obergefell in its entirety. Instead, it’s more likely to test the limits of religious exemptions for government employees who object to same-sex marriage on moral grounds.
Urban alludes to future legal battles over religious liberty — similar to the one now being fought by Davis — but largely overlooks the potential harm such cases could cause, or the added obstacles they may create for same-sex couples seeking to marry.
He concludes his op-ed by chastising Democrats for “raising the specter of rights being torn away,” arguing that “the law and the culture are moving in the opposite direction.”
“[F]ear works. Fear raises money. Fear keeps Americans angry, divided and distrustful,” he writes, accusing Democrats of exploiting the issue for political gain.
“If you keep telling us the sky is falling, eventually people will stop listening,” he writes. “Marriage equality isn’t in danger. Were that to change, Americans on the left, center and right would come to its defense.”
“Urban’s goal with his piece wasn’t to assure LGBTQ+ people that marriage equality is safe; it was to attack Democrats for bringing it up in the first place,” wrote LGBTQ Nation in its assessment of Urban’s arguments.
Moreover, if Gallup’s polling is more reliable than Centerline America’s, it suggests a real erosion of support for same-sex marriage among Republicans — a trend Urban fails to acknowledge.
He also overlooks that several GOP-led legislatures have passed resolutions urging the Supreme Court to overturn Obergefell. Even Republicans who once backed marriage equality, such as U.S. Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.), have shown a readiness to abandon those principles when it becomes politically convenient.
In short, if Urban’s assertions are incorrect, the debate over same-sex marriage may be far less settled than he suggests.
A federal judge has ruled in favor of William Saki, an Ohio man who sued after the state rejected his request for a personalized license plate reading "GAY," which he sought to mark National Coming Out Day and "express a central part of his identity."
The Ohio Bureau of Motor Vehicles (BMV) had rejected the plate as "Inappropriate/Invalid," according to its online registration tool.
Saki then tried to register other plates, including "QUEER" and "HOMO," but those were also rejected, according to the Ohio-based LGBTQ outlet The Buckeye Flame.
Last week in Orlando, restaurateur Trina Gregory transformed 49 parking spots outside her eatery into canvases for local artists, who painted rainbow-colored murals in protest of a new federal mandate targeting street art. Under U.S. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy, the department has ordered states to remove rainbow crosswalks and other murals deemed "visual distractions" from public streets, a directive embraced by Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis.
Both DeSantis and Duffy argue that rainbow crosswalks -- the primary target of their mural crackdown -- amount to political messaging and are inappropriate for public roads.
LGBTQ advocates are condemning a series of six amendments tacked on to the Fiscal Year 2026 National Defense Authorization Act, a bill that funds the U.S. Department of Defense and other defense-related agencies.
The amendments, which target LGBTQ visibility and transgender health care in particular, were passed on largely party-line votes in the House of Representatives, causing Democrats to cry foul.
U.S. Rep. Mark Takano, chair of the Congressional Equality Caucus, accused Republicans of sacrificing bipartisan support for the NDAA by politicizing the process to curry favor with President Donald Trump and socially conservative voters. He warned that, if enacted, the amendments would harm transgender service members, cadets, and dependents of military personnel.
These are challenging times for news organizations. And yet it’s crucial we stay active and provide vital resources and information to both our local readers and the world. So won’t you please take a moment and consider supporting Metro Weekly with a membership? For as little as $5 a month, you can help ensure Metro Weekly magazine and MetroWeekly.com remain free, viable resources as we provide the best, most diverse, culturally-resonant LGBTQ coverage in both the D.C. region and around the world. Memberships come with exclusive perks and discounts, your own personal digital delivery of each week’s magazine (and an archive), access to our Member's Lounge when it launches this fall, and exclusive members-only items like Metro Weekly Membership Mugs and Tote Bags! Check out all our membership levels here and please join us today!
You must be logged in to post a comment.