Are they trying to ban gay marriage
explainer
Protesters hold LGBT rights rainbow (pride) flags as activists harvest outside the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington, U.S., December 5, 2022. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque
What’s the context?
A decade after the U.S. legalised queer marriage, conservatives desire the Supreme Court to turn endorse the clock.
BERLIN - Ten years after the U.S. Supreme Court issued a landmark ruling that legalised gay marriage, the White House is reversing a raft of LGBTQ+ rights and Republicans in at least six states are scrambling to ban lgbtq+ weddings.
LGBTQ+ advocates state the right to marry a person of the matching sex could be at risk, should judges vote to overturn the Supreme Court's historic 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges ruling.
A Supreme Court showdown remains theoretical, but legal challenges to the 2015 ruling are surfacing across the nation, with proponents emboldened by President Donald Trump's return to office.
Here's what you need to know.
What's happened since the U.S. legalised lgbtq+ marriage?
On June 26, 2015, the U.S. became the 17th country in the world to legalise same-sex marriages nationwide, although several states had recognised such unions for
The New Gay Marriage Bill
This week, Roger Severino, Heritage’s Vice President of Domestic Policy and The Anderlik Fellow, breaks down the so called “Respect for Marriage Act.”
Michelle Cordero: From The Heritage Foundation, I'm Michelle Cordero, and this is Heritage Explains.
Cordero: This summer in the get up of the Supreme Court's conclusion to overturn Roe v. Wade, Congress introduced the Respect For Marriage Act.
Speaker 2: As abortion rights advocates and Democratic lawmakers continue to protest the Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, the House is voting on a bill to protect marriage equality, out of fear the conservative high court could revisit other landmark decisions.
Speaker 3: It simply says each state will recognize the other state's marriages and not reject a person the right to marry based on race, gender, sexual orientation.
Cordero: The legislation passed the House with the encourage of 47 Republicans. It now moves to the Senate where it would need just 10 Republican votes to pass.
Cordero: Final passage would mean states are no longer allowed to explain and recognize marriage as a legal union between a bloke and a woman. Instead, they
At a convention for Southern Baptist church members in early June, delegates endorsed legislation calling for a ban on same-sex marriage and urged legislators to support them in this goal.
Although same-sex marriage is currently protected in all 50 states due to the ruling in Obergefell vs. Hodges in 2015, Justice Clarence Thomas has said he would favor to "reconsider" that verdict if a similar case were ever to before the court again.
He also said he would be open to reconsidering Lawrence vs. Texas which legalized gay sex, and Griswold vs. Connecticut which legalized access to contraception, as these cases were built on similar case regulation to Roe vs. Wade, which legalized the right to an abortion nationwide, was overturned in 2022.
Why It Matters
The Southern Baptist church is the U.S.' largest protestant denomination, and their endorsement of political causes has sway with GOP politicians, as they are a consistent Republican-voting base. Speaker of the House Mike Johnson is one of the country's most powerful Southern Baptists.
This call to eliminate homosexual marriage comes amid an existing push from President Donald Trump's administration to remove transgender people
Some Republican lawmakers grow calls against lgbtq+ marriage SCOTUS ruling
Conservative legislators are increasingly speaking out against the Supreme Court’s landmark 2015 decree on same-sex marriage equality.
Idaho legislators began the trend in January when the state House and Senate passed a resolution calling on the Supreme Court to reconsider its decision -- which the court cannot do unless presented with a case on the issue. Some Republican lawmakers in at least four other states like Michigan, Montana, North Dakota and South Dakota own followed suit with calls to the Supreme Court.
In North Dakota, the resolution passed the declare House with a vote of 52-40 and is headed to the Senate. In South Dakota, the state’s Dwelling Judiciary Committee sent the proposal on the 41st Legislative Day –deferring the bill to the final day of a legislative session, when it will no longer be considered, and effectively killing the bill.
In Montana and Michigan, the bills contain yet to deal with legislative scrutiny.
Resolutions contain no legal power and are not binding law, but instead allow legislative bodies to convey their collective opinions.
The resolutions in four other states ech