The House passed a bill on Tuesday recognizing same-sex marriages at the federal level. 47 Republicans voted with Democrats in support of the legislation, which is a direct response to growing concern over a conservative Supreme Court that appears to many as possibly poised to nullify marriage equality in the U.S.
As the New York Times reported, the ‘Respect for Marriage Act’ would now codify federal protections offered to same-sex couples, originally put in place in 2015 after the Supreme Court ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges. That ruling established same-sex marriage as a 14th Amendment right.
The legislation passed in the House with a vote of 267 to 157 and now definitely faces an uncertain battle in a divided U.S. Senate. Senate minority leader, Republican Mitch McConnell, was not willing to publicly state a position on the measure on Tuesday.
The legislation is a preemptive attempt to solidify gay and interracial marriage and contraception rights nationwide. House Democrats say there is a possibility that the conservative Supreme Court could reverse same-sex and interracial marriage and contraception rights at the national level the same way it overturned Roe v. Wade, which includes leaving the question of legal abortions to the various U.S. states.
“The Supreme Court’s extremist and precedent-ignoring decision in Dobbs v. Jackson has shown us why it is critical to ensure that federal law protects those whose constitutional rights might be threatened by Republican-controlled state legislatures,” said House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer. “LGBTQ Americans and those in interracial marriages deserve to have certainty that they will continue to have their right to equal marriage recognized, no matter where they live, should the Court act on Justice Thomas’ draconian suggestion that the 2013 United States v. Windsor and 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges rulings be reconsidered or if it were to overturn Loving v. Virginia.”
Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, suggested the Supreme Court was wrong in Obergefell v. Hodges, saying the decision to permit gay marriage should be left to states.
“In Obergefell, the court said, ‘No, we know better than you guys do, and now every state must, must sanction and permit gay marriage.’ I think that decision was clearly wrong when it was decided. It was the court overreaching,” he said on his podcast.
Writing the majority opinion in the abortion case Dobbs v. Jackson, Justice Clarence Thomas suggested the Supreme Court should revisit past cases.
“In future cases, we should reconsider all of this Court’s substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell. Because any substantive due process decision is ‘demonstrably erroneous,’ we have a duty to ‘correct the error’ established in those precedents,” Thomas wrote.
The “Lawrence” case Thomas referenced was a 2003 ruling by the Supreme Court that ruled criminal punishments for sodomy were unconstitutional and violated privacy rights.
While the bills can pass with a Democratic majority in the House, the Senate would need the support of 10 Republicans to break the filibuster.
© Copyright © 2022 Local TV LLC, All rights reserved.
This content is published through a licensing agreement with Acquire Media using its NewsEdge technology.
they are for EVERYTHING god says is wrong!!!!
and people wonder why the nation is in rapid decline.
MORE RInos we need to see ousted..
What did the 14th amendment have to do with Roe v. Wade?
Writing for the majority opinion in Roe v. Wade, Justice Harry Blackmun said that the court held a woman’s right to an abortion was implicit in the right to privacy protected under the 14th Amendment.
OK, can the right to privacy protect a woman from privately killing her 2 year old baby?
… No? Than why can she kill a unborn baby?
A woman’s body ends at the end of the baby’s umbilical cord and the baby’s body begins.
It is NOT YOUR BODY THAT YOU ARE KILLING, it is the baby’s body!!
Respect For Marriage Act—if that is what it is then this bill would never have passed.
Let them legally bind in any form they want,,,,just do not call it marriage, which is between one man and one woman. Can polygamy be far behind. It already ,since no fault marriage was codified into law, become an Ameriecan family destroyer, just with many wives but only one at a time. You can bet this one will fall to the perverts next with all the American billionaires having more wives than the King of Saudi Arabia, and who when they go broke, guess who gets to support all the kids? The government.
THESE commies, wouldn’t now HOW TO RESPECT something, if they got BIT on their butts.
Why is it so important to shove this up our noses and then allow the little tards to become brown shirts because they now have a law behind them. I think we should start shoving heterosexual stuff up their noses.
Because, ever since this whole bull started, IT WAS NEVER EVER ABOUT Equality, or just ‘being tolerated’. IT WAS ABOUT SHOVING THEIR depravity down everone’s throats, and forcing everyone else to not just like it, but Celebrate it.
In this day and age, is there really any sane person that wants to go back to outlawing interracial marriage? Make the union of Clarence and Ginni Thomas illegal? Didn’t think so – this is just more fear-mongering horse manure from the Libs!
Just another way of placing fear so they vote for you.