House Passes Same-Sex Marriage Bill with Support of 39 Republicans
The House of Representatives with bipartisan support passed legislation on Thursday that would codify same-sex marriage protections.
Lawmakers voted to enact the bill 258 to 169, with 39 Republicans breaking with their party to join 219 Democrats on the motion. Last month, the bill cleared the Senate, with moderate Republican senators like Susan Collins, Rob Portman, and Thom Tillis reaching across the aisle to provide the necessary GOP votes. The measure now goes to President Biden’s desk for final approval.
Many Republicans objected to the Respect for Marriage Act on the grounds that it lacked sufficient provisions prohibiting discrimination against religious institutions and individuals. An amendment adopted by the Senate is intended to ensure that nonprofit religious organizations won’t be forced to help facilitate same-sex marriage, but conservatives in the upper chamber argue it doesn’t go far enough in protecting dissenters.
Any religious entity, according to the language of the text, “shall not be required to provide services, accommodations, advantages, facilities, goods, or privileges for the solemnization or celebration of a marriage.” The bill also excludes polygamous marriage from protections, specifically stating that the union must be between “two” individuals.
Critics of the bill have argued that the language only applies to “nonprofit religious organizations” but not individuals like Jack Phillips, the Christian baker in Colorado who was sued for refusing to bake a custom cake for a same-sex wedding. While Phillips was victorious at the Supreme Court in Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, he endured grueling litigation for many years. The same-sex legislation does not affirm the rights of conscientious objectors like Phillips, our John McCormack noted.
Congress’s action on same-sex marriage comes as the Supreme Court just heard opening arguments in another major religious-liberty case concerning artists’ creative freedom of expression. At issue in the case is whether plaintiff Lorie Smith, a Christian website designer, can be compelled to produce a personalized website celebrating and advertising a same-sex wedding even if it violates her sincerely held religious beliefs.
Democrats spearheaded the bill after the Justice Thomas, in his opinion on the Supreme Court’s decision that overturned Roe v. Wade, suggested that Obergefell v. Hodges, the landmark case that legalized same-sex marriage nationwide, could be next on the chopping block. Thomas noted the faults of the constitutional law doctrine of substantive due process, which has allowed legal activists to derive new categories of rights from the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments shielded from government interference.
