Kelly: Marriage Act a political ploy, says same-sex, interracial marriage 'law of the land'

A bipartisan bill aimed at protecting the right of same-sex and interracial couples to marry passed the U.S. House of Representatives Tuesday amid concerns that the U.S. Supreme Court could roll back additional decisions following its overturning of the landmark abortion law Roe v. Wade last month.

The bill, the Respect for Marriage Act, passed 267 to 157, with 47 Republicans joining their Democratic colleagues. All of the opposition came from Republicans, including U.S. Reps. Mike Kelly, of Butler, R-16th Dist. and Glenn Thompson, of Howard Township, R-15th Dist., and four other Pennsylvania House members.

“It’s very important for the American people to understand that same-sex marriage is already the law of the land. The 2015 Supreme Court case, Obergefell v. Hodges, made that very clear,” Kelly said in a statement.“With just 16 days left in session before Election Day, Speaker Pelosi and the Democrats are forcing the House of Representatives to vote on bills that are already law so they can create a false narrative and deflect from their failed economic and energy policies, which are costing Americans more and more money.”

Next question: In combative news conference, Rep. Mike Kelly responds to claims of pardon, fake electors

“This bill was nothing more than an election-year messaging stunt for Democrats in Congress who have failed to address historic inflation and out-of-control prices at gas pumps and grocery stores," Maddison Stone, a spokesperson for Thompson, said.

But Alex Sphon, president of the NWPA Pride Alliance, said those statements ignore recent comments by Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, who said he believes the court erred in 2015 and Justice Clarence Thomas, who in his concurring opinion in the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization ruling, said the court should reexamine the marriage case and others.

"We've only enjoyed the right to be able to marry who we want for a little over seven years now," Sphon said. "Our (LGBTQ) community right now is very scared that we're going to see that go away. Even in those seven years, we've faced constant attacks, different parts of our community. In particular, Black trans women are still being murdered and that's not really getting any attention. These Republicans that voted against (the Respect for Marriage Act), they clearly don't value us as a community. So seeing these rights potentially eroded away and by having somebody like that vote against it, certainly sends shockwaves through the community. I'm really scared about it."

More About Alex SphonErie native shares journey to self-acceptance

Bill now heads to the Senate

The bill, which now heads to the Senate, where it faces an uncertain outcome, would repeal the 1996 "Defense of Marriage Act," which said that states do not have to recognize same-sex marriages performed elsewhere and codified that the federal government would only recognize marriages between opposite-sex couples.

The bill is a preemptive measure aimed at upholding the marriage rights provided to same-sex couples nationwide in the 2015 Supreme Court decision, Obergefell v. Hodges. The court's 2015 ruling came two years after it had thrown out the "Defense of Marriage Act" and several years after it had thrown out anti-sodomy laws in states like Texas.

The Respect for Marriage Act would also prohibit states from enacting laws against interracial marriage, which the high court struck down in the 1967 case Loving v. Virginia.

Those decisions — Obergefell, Loving and Roe — were all based on the equal protection clause or the due process cause of the 14th Amendment.

Speaking out:Jim Obergefell says SCOTUS abortion ruling paints target on privacy rights, gay marriage

More:Rep. Kelly calls U.S. senator's claims 'patently false'

Democrats and other proponents of abortion rights fear that the conservative-majority court will also strip other federal protections that it had previously afforded to same-sex and interracial couples, as well as the right to contraception.

Before the Obergefell case, some 30 states had laws on the books that banned same-sex marriage, just as several states banned interracial marriage before the Loving decision.

Kelly and Thompson were joined in their opposition to the bill by fellow Pennsylvania Congress members Reps. Guy Reschenthaler, John Joyce, Fred Keller and Lloyd Smucker.

Pennsylvania Reps. Brian Fitzpatrick, Dan Meuser and Scott Perry were among the 47 Republicans to break with their party and support the bill.

Sphon said LGBTQ voters have been even more energized for the upcoming midterm elections since the Roe v. Wade ruling.

"Even with this (Respect for Marriage) act and everything that they're doing now, there are other issues that still need a lot of work," Sphon said. "By going out and voting in November, that's a big way to make sure that our voices are heard."

Voting 'present' on contraceptive bill

Kelly on Thursday voted "present" on a bill about protecting at the federal level access to contraceptives, which was also proposed in anticipation of the U.S. Supreme Court potentially reconsidering previous cases. Asked on Friday why he voted "present" on one bill and "no" on the other, Kelly said:

"After that first vote, I said why are we falling into this pattern that we are going to object to things that are already on the books and law, in order for the Democrats to somehow change the nation's view of what's happening in the country right now?" he said. "It's a distraction. It had nothing to do with real legislation."

Contact Matthew Rink at mrink@timesnews.com or on Twitter at @ETNRink.

This article originally appeared on Erie Times-News: Kelly votes against protections for same-sex, interracial marriage