The Texas Supreme Court appears to have slowed down the progression in LGBTQ rights since the U.S. Supreme Court's 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges decision that ruled gay marriage constitutionally protected. Per Alexa Ura's coverage in the Texas Tribune, the Texas Supremes have remanded "a lower court ruling that said spouses of gay and lesbian public employees are entitled to government-subsidized same-sex marriage benefits" back down the chain in order to clarify whether and how much the state can limit benefits associated with marriage.

The June 2017 University of Texas / Texas Tribune Poll included the latest version of our standard gay marriage question, and registered an uptick in overall support – mostly attributable to an increase in support among Democrats. Support among Republicans, however, remains much less widespread, which seem worth pointing out in a state in which judges are popularly elected (and also worth pointing out given the peculiar history of this case, which the state Supreme Court originally declined to hear until pressure from notable statewide GOP officials, including Governor Abbott and Lieutenant Governor Patrick, led them to reconsider their earlier decision and hear the case).  

The June poll also included a question indirectly related to the matter of providing benefits to same-sex couples. The state's pre-Obergefell resistance to same-sex marriage – in courtrooms, at least – attempted to avoid religious and/or moral objections, arguing instead in favor of the state's interest in fostering procreation as grounds for not recognizing same-sex marriage. Skeptics then and now found these and other legal arguments to be thinly-veiled attempts to avoid seemingly unconstitutional arguments based on religious grounds. Since then, however, pitting religious considerations directly against LGBTQ rights has come into vogue in conservative legal circles given religion's explicit protection in the U.S. Constitution. The U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision to hear the case of a Colorado baker who refused to bake a wedding cake for a gay marriage is the most high profile instance of this conflict, and the outcome of that case could have wide-ranging consequences for this legal approach to battling the gains made by gay and lesbian couples. Constitutional grounds notwithstanding, the June results also found some, though by no mean overwhelming, support, particularly among Republican partisans, for allowing the suspension of anti-discrimination laws for the sake of sincerely held religious beliefs.

As a post-script of sorts, it's also worth noting that the unelected U.S. Supreme Court seems to have taken a real hit in the eyes of Republicans after handing down Obergefell (and upholding the ACA). By way of comparison, it's hard to not to imagine that Chief Justice John Roberts and Anthony Kennedy, at least, would have had some 'splaining to do if they had to face Texas voters after that patch.