WASHINGTON, D. C. -- In a gesture aimed at blocking the conservative-dominated U.S. Supreme Court from reversing its 2015 decision that legalized gay marriage, the U.S. House of Representatives on Tuesday adopted legislation that would provide federal protections for same-sex marriages and require states to recognize them.
The “Respect for Marriage Act” would repeal the 1996 “Defense of Marriage Act,” which stipulated that states don’t have to recognize same-sex marriages performed elsewhere and said the federal government would only recognize marriages between opposite-sex couples. It would also bar states from failing to recognize interracial marriages, as several did before a 1967 Supreme Court decision overturned those laws.
It was approved in a 267 to 157 vote, with backing from all Democrats and 47 Republicans including Ohio’s Dave Joyce of South Russell, Anthony Gonzalez of Rocky River, Mike Turner of Dayton and Mike Carey of Columbus. Its fate remains unclear in the U.S. Senate, where support from 10 Republicans is required to advance most legislation.
“Enshrining marriage equality into federal law is long overdue,” said a statement from Rep. Shontel Brown, a Warrensville Heights Democrat. “I hope the Senate agrees and passes the Act quickly.”
Backers of the legislation argued it is necessary after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned its 1973 Roe v. Wade precedent last month. The recent decision allowed states like Ohio to restrict and ban abortions. Justice Clarence Thomas filed a concurring opinion that argued the court should also overturn the Obergefell v. Hodges decision on gay marriage, as well as decisions in cases that overturned sodomy laws and established the rights of married people to obtain contraceptives.
“While his legal reasoning is twisted and unsound, it is crucial that we take Justice Thomas and the extremist movement behind him at their word,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California argued on the House of Representatives floor, noting that Texas Republican Sen. Ted Cruz has also urged a reconsideration of the same-sex marriage decision. “This is what they intend to do.”
Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio led Republican opposition to the legislation, describing it as “unnecessary” since the author of last month’s decision Justice Samuel Alito, wrote: “The Court emphasizes that this decision concerns the constitutional right to abortion and no other right. Nothing in this opinion should be understood to cast doubt on precedents that do not concern abortion.”
Jordan has been a vocal foe of same-sex marriage over the years. He introduced legislation in 2009 to block the District of Columbia from recognizing same-sex marriages performed elsewhere, boycotted a conservative event because of a gay group’s participation and gave his ticket to a presidential “State of the Union” speech to a county clerk from Kentucky who went to jail for refusing to provide marriage licenses to gay people. Before the Obergefell decision was issued, Jordan, Rep. Bob Gibbs of Holmes County and Rep. Bob Latta of Bowling Green supported a proposed amendment to the U.S. Constitution that would define marriage as “only the union of a man or a woman.”
On the House floor Tuesday, Jordan pointed out that gay marriage was outlawed in numerous states before the Supreme Court legalized it nationwide, that many Democrats supported the Defense of Marriage Act, and Democratic President Bill Clinton signed it.
Jordan described Tuesday’s legislation as part of an effort by Democrats to “delegitimize and attempt to intimidate the court” and said Democrats were focusing on that issue to distract from problems like inflation, skyrocketing prices, high levels of illegal immigration and violent crime.
“We’re here because the Democrats have no answers and desperately hope that a manufactured crisis will help them in November,” said Jordan.
When the House of Representatives passed the Defense of Marriage Act by a 342 to 67 margin in 1996, the only Ohioans to oppose it were Democrats Louis Stokes and Sherrod Brown, who was then in the U.S House of Representatives. A spokesperson for Brown, who is now in the U.S. Senate, said he’s always supported marriage equality and would back the legislation adopted by the House on Tuesday if it were to come before the Senate.
Republican U.S. Sen. Rob Portman of Ohio voted for the Defense of Marriage Act when it came before the House of Representatives but reconsidered the issue after one of his children came out as gay. He announced his support for gay marriage in 2013. A press spokesman for Portman said he will consponsor the “Respect for Marriage” bill in the Senate.
Ohio was one of several dozen states where gay marriage was illegal before the Obergefell decision. In 2004, 62 percent of its voters backed a ballot referendum that defined marriage in Ohio as between a man and a woman and forbade the state from granting any legal status for unmarried individuals “that intends to approximate the design, qualities, significance or effect of marriage.”
The lead plaintiff in the Supreme Court case was an Ohio man, Jim Obergefell, who objected to Ohio’s failure to recognize his same-sex marriage from Maryland and its refusal to list him as “surviving spouse” after his husband’s death. Obergefell, who is currently a state legislative candidate in Ohio, last week urged the House Judiciary Committee to safeguard gay marriage.
“If you do not protect marriage equality, you are saying that we, and our families, do not belong in ‘We the People,’” Obergefell testified at a hearing on how the Supreme Court’s abortion decision might affect other rights. “You are telling us that we do not deserve life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness – the happiness we find in love and family.”