North Dakota lawmakers are pushing a contentious move to challenge the Supreme Court’s ruling on same-sex marriage, stirring both support and opposition within the state and nationwide.
Key Takeaways
- The North Dakota Senate committee chose not to recommend a resolution urging the Supreme Court to reverse its 2015 same-sex marriage ruling.
- The resolution, approved by the North Dakota House, desires a revisit of the Obergefell v. Hodges decision that legalized same-sex marriage.
- The resolution saw a 52-40 approval vote in the North Dakota House in February.
- Rep. Bill Tveit argues that the 2015 ruling violated North Dakota’s laws and the Tenth Amendment.
- Nationwide, similar resolutions have been proposed, although they do not directly affect the Supreme Court’s decisions.
North Dakota’s Legislative Moves
In North Dakota, a Senate committee recently decided against recommending a resolution that calls for the Supreme Court to overturn the 2015 ruling on same-sex marriage, known as Obergefell v. Hodges. The resolution was initiated by Rep. Bill Tveit, passing the North Dakota House by a 52-40 vote in February. Tveit argues that the original decision violated the Tenth Amendment along with the state constitution and laws.
The vote to bypass the recommendation sheds light on the divisions within the legislative chambers. This resolution has sparked emotional responses, emphasized by over 330 testimonies mostly in opposition during a hearing. Rep. Matt Ruby, originally a supporter, expressed regret, highlighting tensions even among proponents of the measure.
Nationwide Implications
The move by North Dakota’s lawmakers is part of a larger national trend, with states introducing similar proposals without directly influencing the Supreme Court. Organizations like MassResistance, labeled an anti-LGBTQ group by GLAAD, are actively promoting resolutions akin to North Dakota’s in various states.
“It’s past time for North Dakota citizens to speak their displeasure with this Supreme Court decision and call for restoration of the definition of marriage as only of the legal union between a man and a woman,” Rep. Bill Tveit said.
Pushback is strong, with individuals like Laura Balliet, an attorney married to a woman, voicing their criticism, saying it fosters an unwelcoming environment. In addition, the American Civil Liberties Union’s Cody Schuler highlighted potential conflicts with the Establishment Clause, due to the resolution’s alignment with a specific religious viewpoint on marriage.
Looking Ahead
North Dakota’s approach, which joins a handful of states considering similar actions, calls into question federal versus state authority over marriage laws. Some states, however, have enacted measures to further protect same-sex marriage, which remains federally legalized since 2015. The North Dakota resolution now moves to a full Senate vote, reflecting the complex and polarizing nature of the ongoing debate over marriage equality at both the state and national levels.
However, it remains to be seen how much impact state resolutions will have on the Supreme Court’s standing decision which remains a cornerstone of legal precedent in support of same-sex marriage. As more states consider similar measures, the national debate around marriage equality and states’ rights is far from over.
