Perry v. Hollingsworth

Q: What court decided Hollingsworth?

Perry v. Hollingsworth was decided by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Q: Who won Hollingsworth?

The outcome in Perry v. Hollingsworth was: Pending. Appeal of Perry v. Schwarzenegger pending before the U.S. Supreme Court regarding the constitutionality of Proposition 8.

Q: What legal issues are involved in Hollingsworth?

Perry v. Hollingsworth involves the following religious liberty issues: LGBTQ & Religious Liberty.

Appeal of Perry v. Schwarzenegger pending before the U.S. Supreme Court regarding the constitutionality of Proposition 8.

ReligiousLiberty.TV

February 26, 2026

0 min read

Court: U.S. Supreme Court Outcome: Pending

LGBTQ & Religious Liberty

Holding: Appeal of Perry v. Schwarzenegger pending before the U.S. Supreme Court regarding the constitutionality of Proposition 8.

Uses AI to generate a structured summary. Takes ~10 seconds.

Official Documents

No official documents found yet.

Coverage on ReligiousLiberty.TV

📎 Document links found in our articles: 📄 opinion

Some Thoughts on the Implications of the Same-Sex Marriage Trial for Religious Minorities January 31, 2010

Primary coverage

Perry v. Hollingsworth is a LGBTQ & Religious Liberty case decided by the U.S. Supreme Court. The court held that appeal of Perry v. Schwarzenegger pending before the U.S. Supreme Court regarding the constitutionality of Proposition 8. The case resulted in a Pending outcome.

1
Mahmoud v. Taylor606 U.S. 522 (2025)
3
U.S. Supreme Court
Parents have a fundamental right to direct the upbringing and medical care of their children without state interference.
📄 Opinion available
2
Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump607 U.S. ____ (2026) (2026)
3
U.S. Supreme Court
The President cannot use emergency statutes to bypass Congress for actions of vast economic or political significance without…
3
Doe XXV v. Archdiocese of New York, Our Lady of Mount Carmel Church, and Our Lady of Mount Carmel School2026 NY Slip Op 30269(U) (2026)
3
State Appellate Court
Neutral principles of negligent hiring and supervision apply to religious institutions; First Amendment does not shield religious organizations…
4
New England Synod, Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, et al. v. Department of Homeland Security, et al.25-40102-FDS (2026)
2
U.S. District Court
Pro-Religion
A DHS policy permitting warrantless immigration enforcement at churches violates RFRA by substantially burdening religious exercise without using…
📄 Opinion available
5
United States v. Don Lemon(2026)
2
U.S. District Court
Pending
The government indicted Don Lemon under the FACE Act for alleged coordination in disrupting religious worship, though judges…
6
Groff v. DeJoy600 U.S. 447 (2023)
2
U.S. Supreme Court
Employers cannot deny religious accommodation to workers unless it causes substantial increased costs or burdens on business operations.
📄 Opinion available
7
Bill 21 (Supreme Court of Canada Appeal)(2026)
2
U.S. Supreme Court
Pending
8
Troogstad v. City of Chicago25-1575 (2025)
2
Plaintiffs failed to demonstrate how a COVID-19 vaccine mandate burdened their specific religious practices under the Free Exercise…
📄 Opinion available
9
Wailes v. Jefferson County Public Schools(2025)
2
Remanded
District court dismissal of parents' challenge to school's policy of assigning students to overnight accommodations based on gender…
📄 Opinion available
10
Union Gospel Mission of Yakima Washington v. Nick Brown24-7246 (2026)
2
The First Amendment's church autonomy doctrine extends beyond the ministerial exception to protect a religious organization's decision to…
📄 Opinion available