Tag: Marriage Equality

Senegal amends its Constitution to ban same-sex marriage

Read more at Erasing 76 Crimes.

By 129 votes in favor and 0 against, the National Assembly of Senegal amended the Constitution, on Monday, June 29, to define marriage exclusively as “the union between a man and a woman”.

The Senegalese Constitution previously had been rather vague on the subject, although same-sex intimacy has been criminalized in Senegal since 1965. The country is in the midst of an anti-gay crackdown that has produced 100s of arrests.  In March, the penalty for same-sex intercourse was doubled, to a maximum prison sentence to 10 years, and gay rights advocacy was banned.

Passage of the constitutional amendment is related to the anti-LGBT crackdown, according to a Senegalese political observer.

Dakar-based Sadio (a pseudonym), told Erasing 76 Crimes “there is little doubt that [the ruling PASTEF party] is placing great emphasis on this aspect of constitutional change in order to reassure the Senegalese people that it will pursue an anti-LGBT agenda, following the tightening of the Criminal Code in the spring so ‘unnatural acts’ are now punishable by 5 to 10 years’ imprisonment and a fine of 10 million CFA francs (about 15,000 euros or US $17,460)”.

In addition, Sadio says, the amendment “helps to rally the ranks within the ruling party following the rifts that led to the dismissal of former Prime Minister Ousmane Sonko”.

The constitutional amendment was inspired by an  opinion piece published on March 8 in the state-owned daily newspaper Le Soleil entitled “A scientific approach to the eradication of homosexuality in Senegal”.

Before the amendment, Article 17 of the Senegalese Constitution defined marriage as follows: “Marriage and the family constitute the natural and moral foundation of human society, and are placed under the protection of the State”.

This addendum has now been included: “Marriage is the union between a man and a woman”.

The amendment provides no definition of what constitutes a man or a woman in biological, chromosomal or anatomical terms. Nevertheless, it establishes a binary system that effectively marginalises intersex people in Senegal.

Following the recent criminalisation of homosexuality in Niger, this marks a further setback for LGBT+ rights in French-speaking Africa.

0

Delaware approves amendment protecting same-sex marriage

Read more at the Washington Blade.

The Delaware General Assembly passed Senate Substitute 2 for Senate Bill 100 on the last day of the legislative session on Tuesday after being rescinded last week. 

Senate Substitute 2 for Senate Bill 100 (SB-100) passed with 28 ‘yes’ votes, meeting the two-thirds threshold required for the bill to pass. Tuesday was the last day of the 153rd General Assembly. 

The amendment would enshrine the right to same-sex and interracial marriage in the Delaware Constitution. 

SB-100 was rescinded last week after it did not receive enough votes to pass. Democrats were short by three votes, with two Democratic members missing from the vote.

Rep. Josue Ortega (D-03) voted ‘no’ on SB-100 and Rep. Medinah Anton-Wilson (D-27) did not vote. However, both members voted ‘yes’ for Senate Substitute 2 for SB-100 on Tuesday. 

Prime sponsor of SB 100, Rep. Claire Snyder-Hall (D-14), made the technical decision to change her vote last week from a ‘yes’ to a ‘no’ at the last minute to keep the bill alive. 

Additionally, Republican Assemblyman Michael Smith (R-22) joined the Democrats with a ‘yes’ vote after voting ‘no’ on SB-100 last week. 

In order for SB 100 to be enshrined into the state Constitution, it must be passed by two consecutive General Assemblies. Thus, the amendment will not be officially added to the Constitution unless it passes in the 154th General Assembly next year. 

Rep. Snyder-Hall introduced the measure earlier this week. 

“Just one week ago, we failed to pass this legislation. We failed the people of Delaware. But today, on the final day of the legislative session, the 153rd General Assembly affirmed that every Delawarean has the fundamental right to marry the person they love, regardless of race or gender,” said Snyder-Hall.

“Thank you to my colleagues for recognizing that the right to marry is a right worthy of protection and for voting yes on this important constitutional amendment.” 

0

Delaware fails to pass amendment protecting marriage equality in “egregious vote”

Read more at LGBTQ Nation.

A proposed amendment to enshrine same-sex and interracial marriage protections into the Delaware Constitution failed in the state House on Tuesday.

The amendment had passed the state Senate earlier this month, but lost by four votes in the House, where a 2/3 majority of 28 votes was needed. Two Democrats did not vote in favor of the bill. State Rep. Josue Ortega (D) voted no, while state Rep. Madinah Wilson-Anton (D) did not vote.

Gay state Rep. Eric Morrison (D) told the Washington Blade that an anonymous Republican had agreed to vote yes, which would have secured the 28 votes needed if all 27 Democrats also voted yes, but the GOP lawmaker did not keep his word.

Ortega, the Democrat who voted no, told WHYY it was his “duty as an elected representative… to listen to the concerns of the people I serve.”

“After carefully considering the feedback I received,” he continued, “I concluded that I will be voting no, because it was the best decision that best represented the majority of my constituents.”

Rep. Claire Snyder-Hall (D), who sponsored the measure, also ended up voting no, but she explained she did so as a strategic decision once she realized the amendment did not have enough votes to pass.

“That’s a maneuver that allows me to bring this bill back up,” she explained in a video, “because I’m still hopeful that we’re going to be able to get the votes we need to pass this basic bill.”

“Today, the General Assembly turned its back on the people of this state,” Snyder-Hall wrote in the caption of her post. “Every Delawarean deserves the right to marry the person they love, regardless of race or gender. But today, when we had the chance to add an extra layer of protection from attempts to turn back the clock and strip our constituents of the rights that Democrats fought for decades to secure, we failed.”

She emphasized that she will keep fighting. “The groups most affected by this egregious vote are no strangers to setbacks,” she said. “There are still three legislative days left in the 153rd General Assembly and I am hopeful that we will be able to get the votes required to pass this incredibly basic – but important – bill.”

The Blade explained that the bill must pass before July 1, when the two-year-long session ends, or else another attempt to pass it will take at least three years.

State Rep. Mike Smith (R) defended his no vote and the lack of support from his party in a statement to WHYY: “This is just restating rights that have already been protected under Delaware law. It’s important for constituents to know that.”

State Rep. Kamela Smith (D), on the other hand, said she voted yes despite her own religious beliefs due to her “responsibility here as a legislator, and that responsibility is to uphold the constitution.”

“My job is to make sure that the law works fairly for everyone,” she continued, “even when people don’t all believe the same things I do.”

Delaware Attorney General Kathy Jennings (D) called the assembly’s failure to pass the amendment “shocking and upsetting” and a failure “to advance a basic, core tenant of equality.”

“Failing to permanently enshrine those protections in our state’s Constitution is an appalling abdication of the state government’s duty to guarantee the rights of every Delawarean,” she added. “It adds insult to injury that this vote was cast in the closing days of Pride Month.”

0

Christian judges in Texas are demanding the right not to marry same-sex couples. They’re winning.

Read more at LGBTQ Nation.

The State Commission on Judicial Conduct in Texas was overruled last week after it disciplined a justice of the peace in Waco for refusing to marry same-sex couples on religious grounds.

A Texas county judge ruled the commission cannot investigate, sanction, or discipline McLennan County Justice of the Peace Dianne Hensley for refusing to officiate same-sex weddings because of her Christian beliefs. Hensley was awarded $10,000 in compensatory damages and $630,000 in attorney’s fees after years of litigation.

“I think the agency overstepped itself, and what we saw was their bias on the issue and not the law,” Hensley told KERA News in North Texas.

The origin of Hensley’s suit dates back to Obergefell v Hodges, the 2015 U.S. Supreme Court decision granting nationwide marriage equality.

Judges and justices of the peace are allowed, but not required, to officiate weddings in Texas. After previously declining to marry any couples following the decision, Hensley changed her mind in 2016 and said she would marry straight couples only.

She advertised that stance in a 2017 interview with the Waco Tribune-Herald, adding that she referred same-sex couples to a different judge and other nearby officiants.

The judicial conduct commission launched an investigation soon after and, in 2019, issued a public warning to Hensley that she was in violation of commission rules.

With the support of First Liberty Institute, the right-wing Christian nationalist legal organization shepherding other anti-LGBTQ+ cases around the country, Hensley sued. First Liberty argued her decision was protected by the Texas Religious Freedom Restoration Act, signed into law by then-Gov. George W. Bush (R) in 1999. That law prohibits the government from making restrictions that “substantially burden” an individual’s freedom of religion.

“People cannot be made — cannot be forced into participating in things that they have a religious disagreement with,” First Liberty attorney Hiram Sasser said following last week’s verdict.

The suit prompted action from the Texas Supreme Court, as well. After agreeing that Hensley’s suit could continue, but not ruling on her religious freedom claims, the court said that judges who decline to perform a wedding ceremony based on a “sincerely held religious belief” won’t violate the state’s rules on judicial impartiality.

The court found a grey area where the absence of a requirement to perform wedding ceremonies grants officiants the right to marry whom they choose.

That support from the highest levels of the Texas judiciary appears to have emboldened Hensley’s claim that officiants should be allowed to marry whom they choose.

In December, Hensley asked a federal court to overturn marriage equality in the U.S. entirely, arguing that marriage for same-sex couples is unconstitutional because it was legalized in a decision that “subordinat[ed] state law to the policy preferences of unelected judges.”

Hensley is one among several Christian officiants claiming “religious freedom” in their opposition to marrying same-sex couples in Texas.

Jack County Judge Brian Umphress also sued the commission, alleging he was afraid he could face the same punishment as Hensley. The Texas Supreme Court ruled in January that he wouldn’t face discipline for his choice not to marry gay couples, KERA reported.

A class-action lawsuit in Tarrant County has been filed on behalf of justices of the peace who are unwilling to perform same-sex marriages. They’re looking to recover damages from the Judicial Conduct Commission because they say they were forced to stop performing weddings altogether in fear of disciplinary action.

Like Hensley, Kim Davis, the infamous Kentucky county clerk who refused to sign marriage licenses for same-sex couples immediately following the Supreme Court’s 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges decision, asked the Supreme Court to overturn its marriage equality ruling. The Court declined to hear her appeal in November.

Despite her lawsuit aiming to wipe out marriage equality, Hensley continues to maintain that her right to religious freedom isn’t impacting gay couples in Texas because others are available to marry them.

Now, though, she says there isn’t a big demand for her services, and she may stop officiating weddings altogether.

“I was just accommodating people who called needing a low-cost wedding, and it’s been long enough now we don’t get many calls anymore,” Hensley said. “So, unless we start getting a lot of demand, I may not.”

0

Nepal Supreme Court rules in favour of equal marriage in huge win for LGBTQ+ rights

Read more at Pink News.

On 18 June, the court ordered the South Asian country’s government to ensure equal marriage rights for queer and trans people. The ruling makes Nepal the 40th country worldwide to legally recognise equal marriage.

Equal marriage was previously recognised in Nepal following an interim ruling in 2023 from the Supreme Court, when a group of nine LGBTQ+ activists sued the country’s marriage laws that defined marriage as a union between a man and a woman.

The lawsuit led to the court ordering Nepal’s government to create a new marriage register for couples from gender minority communities.

This month, the court’s new ruling will provide certainty and security for Nepali LGBTQ+ couples wishing to marry in the future.

Speaking to Nepali non-profit Pahichan on 19 June, human rights activist, monk and former politician Sunil Babu Pant said: “This landmark ruling marks a historic milestone for equality, dignity, and human rights in Nepal, while providing crucial legal clarity and protection for the rights of same-sex couples.”

They continued: “The verdict reaffirms the constitutional principles established in Sunil Babu Pant vs Nepal govt, and strengthened through later cases, including Maya Surendra’s first-ever legal registration of non-traditional heterosexual marriage in Nepal.

“It confirms that gender and sexual minority couples are entitled to equal protection of the law and reinforces Nepal’s commitment to inclusion, equality, and non-discrimination.”

The Blue Diamond, an LGBTQ+ rights organisation based in Nepal, also celebrated the decision.

“The ruling is now the fourth Supreme Court decision over nearly two decades that makes clear: the freedom to marry the person you love is a guarantee under Nepal’s Constitution, and LGBTQIA+ couples and their families must be afforded the dignity, respect, and protections that only marriage can provide,” the group shared in a statement on Instagram.

“With this victory, a counter-writ petition filed by advocate Yuvraj Paudel aiming to block these rights was decisively dismissed by the court,” it continued.

“We, the Blue Diamond Society team, welcome this important milestone from the Supreme Court of Nepal towards ensuring marriage equality provisions in Nepal and are excited to witness the next steps from the Government in translating this ruling into practice.”

0

Same-sex marriage support dips by 3 points from 2025: Gallup

Read more at The Hill.

Americans’ support for same-sex marriage has dipped in the last year, according to a new poll.

In the Gallup poll, 65 percent of respondents said same-sex marriages “should be valid” under the law, while 32 percent said same-sex marriages “should not be valid” under the law. Three percent had no opinion.

Last May, 68 percent said same-sex marriages “should be valid” under the law and 29 percent said the marriages “should not be valid.” In May 2024, 69 percent backed the legality of same-sex marriages and 23 percent did not.

In recent years, Republican lawmakers in some states have called for the Supreme Court to reconsider its landmark Obergefell v. Hodges decision made in 2015, which guaranteed same-sex marriage nationwide. A number of GOP senators in 2022 voted against the Respect for Marriage Act, which protects same-sex and interracial marriages.

More recently, conservatives have increasingly targeted transgender people through efforts to limit access to gender-affirming care and restrict transgender children competing in sports categories aligned with their gender.

Tension boiled over between House Republicans concerning gay rights earlier this week, with GOP Rep. Mike Lawler (N.Y.) and former Rep. George Santos (R-N.Y.) pushing back on Rep. Andy Ogles (R-Tenn.) who made a now-deleted social media post saying that “homosexuality has no place in America.”

“Happy Nuclear Family Month,” Ogles added in the message, seemingly referencing Pride Month, which is celebrated in June.

In response to his Republican colleague, Lawler said, “Homosexuality exists. In America.”

“In fact, Andy, you have family, friends, neighbors, colleagues and constituents who are gay and lesbian. It doesn’t make them less than or somehow unworthy of being an American. What an absolutely idiotic statement to make.”

Ogles later told The Hill that he had not approved the post.

The Gallup poll took place from May 1 to 17, featuring 1,001 adults and a margin of error of 4 percentage points.

1

Poland’s leader promises to start recognizing foreign same-sex marriages, after EU court ruling

Read more at LGBTQ Nation.

Poland’s Prime Minister Donald Tusk said on Tuesday that his government would quickly work to follow recent court rulings requiring Poland to legally recognize same-sex marriages conducted in other European Union (EU) member nations.

Recent rulings by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and Poland’s Supreme Administrative Court (NSA) both require Poland to recognize foreign same-sex marriages, after a married same-sex couple (including a Polish citizen) weren’t allowed to have their 2018 German marriage certificate entered into the Polish civil registry.

The men challenged the denial at the NSA, which then referred the case to the CJEU. The CJEU ruled in November 2025 that the couple’s marriage was valid throughout the EU’s 27-member bloc, and that Poland could recognize their union without also altering its laws to start offering same-sex marriages.

Then, last March, the NSA ordered the government to transcribe the men’s same-sex marriage certificate into the Polish system, resulting in de facto government recognition of a same-sex couple’s marriage in the country; a historic first for Poland.

In comments to the media before a closed cabinet meeting on Tuesday, Tusk apologized for the “years of rejection and humiliation” that same-sex couples have experienced due to Poland not legally recognizing their marriages, Notes from Poland reported.

“[This is] a matter of human dignity: the right to happiness, the right to equal treatment by the state,” Tusk said. “I would like to apologize to all those who, for many, many years, felt rejected and humiliated. For many years, the [Polish] state has failed the test.”

Tusk also said that Poland currently “lacks statutory regulations” that would ensure that same-sex couples receive the same legal and social protections as different-sex couples.

However, he said, “We have committed to – and I will personally ensure this – abiding by the rulings as a priority,” adding that any changes must be conducted in compliance with existing Polish law. He also urged government members “to respect the dignity of every human being” while figuring out and implementing new policies, some of which may require parliamentary or executive approval.

Tusk also said any legal recognition is “no way a path to the possibility of adoption.”

Karolina Gierdal, a lawyer with the Polish LGBTQ+ advocacy organization Lambda Warszawa, told TVP World, “It is sad that the LGBT community is once again presented as a threat, as if society needs reassurance that adoption rights ‘won’t happen.’ The reality is that children are already being raised in same-sex families in Poland, and maintaining the current legal situation means reducing the level of legal protection available to those children.”

Separately, Warsaw Mayor Rafał Trzaskowski, who is a senior figure in Tusk’s Civic Platform party (Platforma Obywatelska, PO), announced that his city would begin legally recognizing foreign same-sex marriages immediately on a municipal level, long before the national government updates its own policies.

Last month, a group of over 100 non-governmental organizations urged Poland to take action to abide by the CJEU and NSA’s rulings. The groups noted that Tusk and his party were elected to power in 2023 on promises to restore Poland’s rule of law, after 10 years of corrupt, anti-democratic rule by the country’s far-right, anti-LGBTQ+ Law and Justice Party.

“Right-wing governments have distorted what we understand by the rule of law, treating it as an empty slogan rather than a real principle of state operation,” the groups wrote. “In a democratic state governed by the rule of law, the government has no authority to decide which judgments merit enforcement.”

So far, 18 countries in the EU offer legalized same-sex marriages, though all member countries are required to legally recognize them, even if they don’t offer them to their own citizens.

While Tusk’s political party promised to work to offer national same-sex civil partnerships, the initiative died due to opposition from Poland’s center-right Polish People’s Party (PSL). A parliamentary coalition considered offering some rights to same-sex couples and unmarried partners instead, but without actually offering civil unions nationwide.

However, neither proposal has come up for a parliamentary vote.

0

Parents in Korea share heartwarming deposition in support of legalizing daughter’s same-sex marriage

Read more at LGBTQ Nation.

A same-sex couple fighting for a legal marriage in South Korea has the staunch support of two very loving parents behind them.

Park Yeo-jin and Hwang Hee-yeon committed to each other for life in a 2020 wedding ceremony, but have been unable to register their marriage legally, since South Korea doesn’t recognize marriage between two people of the same sex.

They have filed a lawsuit in response, and Yeo-Jin’s parents have submitted heartwarming depositions in support, as reported by South Korean publication Hankyoreh.

“I can’t help wondering what is so wrong about the courage and devotion that these two people have shown,” wrote her father.

He admitted he was “worried that they could end up hurt” when he first learned they were dating, due to “how hostile the world can be.” He also thought it could be a phase.

“But the two of them have been truly brave,” he said, “supporting each other with love and devotion through all of life’s hardships. As a father and a human being, I respect Park Yeo-jin and Hwang Hee-yeon and their wishes.”

“As someone who knows them well, I don’t see any difference between them and other married couples, even if they are a same-sex couple,” he continued. “I think we make society better when we focus on and embrace what is fundamentally right rather than discriminating based on difference.”

Yeo-jin’s mother also wrote to the court, saying that the couple has shown “love and dedication to one another, living and planning their future together.” She said seeing that “helped turn my concerns into affirmation and support for them.”

“If marriage is a relationship based on love and trust where you spend your life together, overcoming life’s difficulties through understanding and dedication,” she added, “then Yeo-jin and Hee-yeon are unquestionably a married couple.”

The court held a hearing on the matter on April 27, reportedly the first time in 11 years that a case of this nature was not dismissed outright.

“I was surprised and thankful that we were unexpectedly given this hearing,” Hee-yeon told Hankyoreh. “The fact that we were able to share our experience was encouraging and meaningful.”

“What we want isn’t special rights or treatment,” she added. “All we want is for the bare minimum rights so that we can protect and take responsibility for one another, just like any other couple.”

South Korea has made some advances recently. In October 2025, it was announced that the country’s census would allow same-sex couples to identify themselves as spouses for the first time.  LGBTQ+ activists praised the move as a significant step toward equality.

While homosexuality is not criminalized in the country, same-sex marriage remains illegal, and according to Equaldex, only 23% of the public fully supports LGBTQ+ people being open about who they are.

Despite South Korea’s portrayal in its global entertainment industry as modern and gay-friendly, the country has long tolerated LGBTQ+ discrimination and, in a 2020 report, was ranked among the least gay-inclusive countries in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

The absence of progress can be traced to lobbying efforts by the United Christian Churches of Korea and other church associations, and to very public hate campaigns by loosely affiliated groups like Anti-Homosexuality Christian Solidarity, who have deep-rooted connections to the country’s political class.

Efforts to pass a broad anti-discrimination law through the legislature have failed many times, but hope was renewed last year when the country’s liberal party took a majority of seats in the legislature.

While LGBTQ+ rights have a long way to go in South Korea, advocates scored another major victory in the summer of 2024, when the nation’s top court ruled to uphold the rights of people in same-sex relationships, giving them the same rights as people in heterosexual relationships.

The landmark ruling states that benefits from South Korea’s National Health Insurance Service (NHIS) can be claimed by people in same-sex partnerships and that treating same-sex couples differently from heterosexual ones is “an act of discrimination that… violates human dignity and the right to pursue happiness.”

0

Hobby Lobby is funding the latest push to end marriage equality

Read more at LGBTQ Nation.

Earlier this year, a group of 47 anti-LGBTQ+ organizations launched a new campaign to end marriage equality in the U.S., demanding that the Supreme Court overturn Obergefell v. Hodges. The campaign, called “Greater Than” – a response to the push for equality by claiming that straight people are “greater than” queer people – immediately got the media’s attention.

Now the Seattle Times has revealed that a key organization behind the Greater Than campaign is being funded by the conservative Christian business Hobby Lobby, the same business that got the Supreme Court to rule in 2014 that for-profit corporations don’t have to pay for employees’ health care that covers contraception if that contraception goes against the corporation’s religious beliefs.

Katy Faust is the founder and president of Them Before Us, an organization devoted to ending marriage rights for same-sex couples in the U.S. Faust’s mother is a lesbian who came out after marrying Faust’s father, and her parents divorced when she was 10. She converted to Christianity a few years later, when she was in high school.

Faust insists that she didn’t devote her life to attacking LGBTQ+ rights out of some kind of resentment towards her mother, although she now says she no longer considers her mother a parent.

The Seattle Times notes that Faust has been campaigning against marriage rights since at least 2012, when she started a blog called “Ask The Bigot,” a website she claimed would “debunk” the notion that marriage rights opponents are bigots.

She advocated for ending marriage rights over the years, but saw an opportunity for a renewed push after the Supreme Court overturned federal reproductive rights protections guaranteed in Roe v. Wade in 2022. The Court effectively let states decide whether abortion would be legal, and many of them immediately banned it, something people like Faust hope to see happen for same-sex marriage.

And the recent push is getting more funding. Them Before Us was founded in 2018, and its IRS reports show that it received less than $50,000 in revenue for its first few years of operation before Roe was overturned. In 2022, though, it received $200,000. In 2024, that became nearly $1 million, and Faust collected a salary of $135,000.

Them Before Us’s 2024 filings show a $300,000 donation from The Servant Foundation, a Christian organization funded by Hobby Lobby’s founder, David Green, and his family. It’s the same organization behind those “He Gets Us” ads about Jesus that ran during the 2024 and 2025 Super Bowls.

Them Before Us – referring to how children’s interests should come before adults’ – is attempting to refocus the debate on marriage rights around children in order to capitalize on the recent moral panic around “groomers,” a push from the right that started in the early 2020s to associate LGBTQ+ people with child sex abuse once again.

Faust claims that marriage equality has made children’s lives worse, contrary to what social science says on the matter. She said in a March Uncloseted Media interview that there is no “right to adopt” but that children “have a natural right to be known and loved by their mother and father.”

Faust herself has adopted a child who is from China.

0

South Carolina Republicans demand Supreme Court overturn marriage equality

Read more at LGBTQ Nation.

Republican lawmakers in South Carolina are trying to pass a resolution to demand the Supreme Court overturn its 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges ruling that legalized marriage equality in all the states that hadn’t yet done so, including South Carolina.

A group of 12 Republicans in the South Carolina House of Representatives introduced H-5501, a concurrent resolution that calls on the state to “reject the Supreme Court of the United States’ Obergefell decision and to call on the Supreme Court to reverse Obergefell and restore the natural law definition of marriage, a union of one man and one woman and to insist on restoring the issue of marriage and enforcement of all laws pertaining to marriage back to the several states and the people.”

The local TV news station WACH notes that concurrent resolutions have no legal force in South Carolina. Still, progressive advocates called out the resolution.

“Lawmakers in South Carolina cannot undo marriage for all committed couples in this country,” ACLU of South Carolina executive director Jce Woodrum said. “These lawmakers are fringe extremists.”

South Carolina passed a state constitutional amendment banning same-sex couples from getting married in 2006. In 2025, a PRRI poll found that 54% of people in South Carolina now support marriage rights for same-sex couples.

The resolution is part of a trend started last year, as far-right Republicans in state legislatures across the country started introducing resolutions demanding the Supreme Court overturn marriage equality. Other states that have seen such resolutions include Idaho, Michigan, Montana, North Dakota, and South Dakota.

Several red states have also considered bills that would give extra rights to opposite-sex couples who get married.

Two Supreme Court justices said in 2020 that they would like to overturn Obergefell. Conservative Justice Amy Coney Barrett said in 2025 that it is unlikely to happen.

0

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑