On the same day the U.S. Senate rejected a proposed constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage, a House committee approved a measure to ban federal courts from ordering states to recognize same-sex “marriages.”
The House Judiciary Committee voted 21–13 July 14 to approve a bill that would strip federal courts of jurisdiction in the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act, which allows states not to recognize gay “marriages” performed in other states.
“When federal judges step out of line, Congress has the responsibility to drop the red flag,” Rep. Lamar Smith, R-Texas, told the Associated Press.
Democrats on the committee said the bill was a political tool, like the Federal Marriage Amendment, to rally supporters.
The measure now heads to the full House. Republican House leaders have also said they may schedule a vote on the gay marriage amendment before the November elections.
Reacting to the 50–48 Senate vote that effectively killed the gay “marriage” amendment, President Bush said he would continue his effort to define marriage as being between one man and one woman.
“Activist judges and local officials in some parts of the country are not letting up in their efforts to redefine marriage for the rest of America, and neither should defenders of traditional marriage flag in their efforts,” he said in a statement.
At the same time, a Massachusetts judge said she will decide whether a 1913 state law that has been used to keep out-of-state gay couples from marrying in Massachusetts should be struck down.
Superior Court Judge Carol Ball heard the case of eight couples from New England and New York who were turned away when they applied for marriage licenses. Gov. Mitt Romney said he stands by the law.
And, in New York, charges against two Unitarian Universalist ministers were dropped after they were charged with breaking state law by officiating at the marriages of 13 gay couples.
New Paltz Town Justice Judith Reichler dismissed the charges against Kay Greenleaf and Dawn Sangrey. The two women were charged in March after they presided at gay weddings that were briefly allowed in the town.
“There can be no constitutional rationale for denying same-sex couples the right to receive the benefits that are so lavishly bestowed on mixed-sex couples,” Reichler wrote, according to the Associated Press.
(RNS)
Share with others: