Tag: Marriage Equality

Oklahoma GOP legislators ask Supreme Court to overturn same-sex marriage

*This is reported by LGBTQ Nation.

Christian nationalist Oklahoma state Sen. Dusty Deevers (R) and state Rep. Jim Olsen (R) have filed a resolution asking the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn Obergefell v. Hodges, the 2015 U.S. Supreme Court decision that legalized same-sex marriage nationwide. Republican lawmakers in at least five other states have introduced similar resolutions, all of which are largely symbolic and non-binding.

Senate Concurrent Resolution 8 claims that the 2015 high court ruling conflicts with the original meaning of the U.S. Constitution, the country’s founding principles, and “the deeply rooted history and tradition” regarding state regulation of marriage rights. It also notes that 75% of Oklahoma voters supported banning any recognition of same-sex unions in a 2004 ballot measure.

The resolution refers to the Supreme Court decision as an “unwarranted governmental intrusion,” accuses the high court of abusing “the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause to fabricate substantive rights,” and says the 2015 decision is “undermining the civil liberties” of states “without any valid constitutional warrant for doing so.”

“For millennia marriage has been understood, both in biblical teaching and in the Anglo-American common-law tradition, as the lifelong covenant union of one man and one woman,” the resolution states. “Obergefell arbitrarily and unjustly rejected and prohibited states from recognizing this definition of marriage in favor of its own definition of marriage and a novel, flawed interpretation” of the U.S. Constitution.

It also notes that both Democratic Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Elena Kagan had previously officiated same-sex weddings before the ruling and “should have recused themselves” from the Obergefell case. It further states that the decision has resulted in litigation directly targeting Christian business owners who refuse to accommodate same-sex couples and has resulted in Christians being vilified as “bigoted.”

“Obergefell played a role in erasing biological distinctions in other arenas, threatening women’s privacy, safety, and athletic opportunities,” the resolution adds, drawing a dubious connection between same-sex marriage and transgender people’s civil rights.

If the resolution is approved by state lawmakers, copies of it will be distributed to the Supreme Court, the president of the U.S. Senate, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, members of the Oklahoma congressional delegation and the Oklahoma attorney general, the resolution states.

Similar resolutions have been introduced in at least five other states: Michigan, Idaho, Montana, North Dakota, and South Dakota.

Deevers & Olsen’s resolution relies on legal misinterpretations

The court’s 2015 decision relied partially on the 1967 high court ruling in Loving v. Virginia, which granted marriage rights to heterosexual couples consisting of individuals from different racial ethnicities.

“If rights were defined by who exercised them in the past, then received practices could serve as their own continued justification and new groups could not invoke rights once denied,” the Supreme Court wrote in its 2015 decision.

The court’s majority opinion also ruled that governmental refusal to recognize same-sex marriages denies them numerous benefits of marriage, including the ability to care for children and family members. State bans on same-sex marriages also restricted same-sex couples’ and their families’ ability to move freely around the country, since their rights could vary greatly if they moved to an anti-marriage state, the court ruling said.

As such, the court ruled that same-sex marriage bans violate both the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause by needlessly introducing instability into same-sex relationships for no justifiable or compelling government interest.

While some Christian businesses have been sued for refusing to serve LGBTQ+ people and same-sex couples based on “sincerely held religious beliefs,” these lawsuits have focused on how such refusals violate public accommodations protections in state anti-discrimination laws, which require businesses to treat citizens equally, regardless of sexual orientation.

Deevers has long opposed same-sex marriages

Speaking last month to Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council (FRC) — which has been certified as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Research Center — Deevers said, “The fact is, Obergefell is fundamentally antithetical to all of these, and there is just no right to gay marriage in the Constitution.”

Despite this claim, the Supreme Court believes that the Constitution’s equal protection and due process provisions require the government to treat all individuals equally under the law unless there’s a compelling government interest to do otherwise.

“Ultimately, marriage is not the state’s institution, it’s God’s institution,” Deevers said. “No Supreme Court ruling that redefines a God-ordained institution is ever truly settled: not morally or culturally, and even constitutionally. The rogue court will stand in judgment before God for their decision.”

Deevers’s campaign website also clearly states his anti-LGBTQ+ beliefs.

“It is outrageous that drag queens are permitted to dance and twerk for children at pride parades and story hours in our state,” his website states. “It is outrageous that … public schools have exposed elementary and middle school children to… LGBTQ+ propaganda…. It is outrageous that Critical Race Theory and Queer Theory dominate in many of our public institutions. I promise to support legislation to put a stop to all of this.”

0

Couple planning Puerto Vallarta wedding claims discrimination

*This is reported on LGBTQNation.

A Canadian couple planning a destination wedding in gay mecca Puerto Vallarta says they’ve been discriminated against by the beachside hotel where they’d hoped to tie the knot.

Jeremy Alexander and Ryan Sheepwash shared their experience in now-viral videos on Instagram and TikTok.

“Soooo disappointed that my fiancée and I got discriminated against for our wedding plans in Puerto Vallarta by #Sheraton!! Worst of all, they’ve probably done this to countless other same-sex couples.”

The pair had been planning their wedding for months, including a trip to PV to check out prospective venues. They say a tour of the Sheraton Buganvilias Resort won them over, with hospitable staff and a price within their range.

But the couple’s experience with the hotel’s wedding planner deteriorated over a succession of efforts to lock the wedding in. When a quote finally arrived after three months, Alexander and Sheepwash were provided with an outrageous estimate of the bill.

The invoice said 25 deluxe, all-inclusive ocean view rooms would set guests back $970 each; the hotel demanded a $36,000 deposit for half of the rooms.

“It’s not reasonable,” Alexander said. “No one can afford that.”

It was also much more than the hotel had initially quoted the couple. The Sheraton also said they couldn’t accommodate the couple until March of 2027.

Alexander and Sheepwash got engaged in Puerto Vallarta in February 2024.

Shocked at the estimate, the couple decided to ask a straight friend to “request a quote just to see apples to apples what it looks like.”

That inquiry for a hypothetical wedding, planned for the same dates Alexander and Sheepwash wanted, came with a different outcome: a “deluxe package” for 50 people was $8,500, or $254 per person per night, and required a deposit of just $1,700 — on the same dates Alexander and Sheepwash had requested.

“We just feel defeated,” said Sheepwash in the TikTok video. “It’s not fair because we love each other and we really want to get married, and we want to make it special and we want to make it perfect.”

“We felt we’d be indirectly complicit to the system if we’re aware of it and we’re not combating it,” Alexander told NBC News. “That was the major driving factor in us wanting to put the story out there.”

The hotel is a “third-party franchisee” of the Marriott corporation and declined to comment.

Marriott International said in a statement that the company has reached out to the couple “to learn more about their experience and are working with the property to offer a solution.”

“The Sheraton Buganvilias has been active in the LGBTQ community in Puerto Vallarta for years, not only hosting LGBTQ+ weddings and groups but also supporting Pride events in Puerto Vallarta,” the spokesperson said. “Marriott remains steadfast in our commitment to ensure guests are treated with respect and understanding.” 

“It’s very clear there’s an issue all the way to the top at this particular Sheraton of homophobia,” Alexander said. Marriott “would need to make some seriously impactful change before I’d be entertaining what they have to say there. They are part of a lot of queer travel alliances, and the actions have to line up with reality, and right now it doesn’t.”

Alexander and Sheepwash aren’t the first to experience the hotel’s discriminatory treatment. “Just Google it,” Alexander advises on Insta.

In 2019, Josh Rimer, a television host and Mr. Gay Canada 2019, and his then-fiancé were turned away from the hotel after choosing it to host their own wedding.  

And while researching the hotel, Sheepwash uncovered a TikTok video posted by Daniel Galecio, a wedding planner in Puerto Vallarta, who said the same Sheraton staff member who provided the couple’s inflated estimate told him the resort is currently unable to host same-sex weddings. 

“That hotel has a history of years of discrimination, and all the city knows — all the gays know,” Galecio said.

Marriage equality became legal nationally in Mexico in 2022.

0

‘Colorado is for everyone’: Polis signs bill repealing same-sex marriage ban

*This is reported by KDVR.

 Colorado Gov. Jared Polis signed the “Protecting the Freedom to Marry Act” on Monday, repealing the state’s same-sex marriage ban from Colorado law.

The bill removes language that says marriage is only between a man and woman and aligns statute with the Colorado Constitution after voters in November decided to repeal that ban. The state House passed the bill in March after the Senate passed it in early February.

“Colorado is for everyone, no matter who you are or who you love,” Polis said in a press release. “Last November, the voters got rid of outdated language in our constitution that banned same-sex marriage. This is a long overdue step in the right direction and today’s law I’m signing ensures that Coloradans can marry who they love in our Colorado for all.”

First Gentleman Marlon Reis, in the press release, said this bill defends the progress made for LGBTQ+ rights.

“I am personally grateful to Senator Danielson, Representatives Garcia and Titone, and the countless community leaders and advocates whose hard work has made today possible,” Reis said. “This landmark legislation fulfills the hopes and dreams of so many across our LGBTQ+ and allied communities, and affirms that progress hard won is always worth defending, and in the end, love triumphs over all.”

Colorado’s previous same-sex marriage ban had been unenforceable since the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges decision.

0

Japan Osaka court holds same-sex marriage ban unconstitutional

The Osaka High Court held that Japan’s lack of recognition of same-sex marriage is unconstitutional on Tuesday. The Osaka High Court is the fifth court to rule that the ban on same-sex marriage is unconstitutional after similar rulings in the high courts of Sapporo, Tokyo, Fukuoka and Nagoya.

While Presiding Judge Kumiko Honda upheld the Osaka District Court’s decision not to award damages, Honda ruled that Japan’s Civil Code and Family Register Act that do not allow same-sex marriage violates the right to equality as set out in Article 14 of the Constitution of Japan, which states: “All of the people are equal under the law and there shall be no discrimination in political, economic or social relations because of race, creed, sex, social status or family origin.” The court also ruled that the marriage ban breaches Article 24, where laws involving marriage and family “shall be enacted from the standpoint of individual dignity and the essential equality of the sexes.”

In 2019, three same-sex couples filed a lawsuit against the Japanese government, requesting 1 million yen (about $7,400) in damages per person from the state. They were among 14 couples who filed lawsuits in Sapporo, Tokyo, Nagoya, Fukuoka and Osaka. The plaintiffs had appealed to the High Court after the Osaka District Court in June of 2022 ruled that the lack of same-sex marriage recognition was constitutional under the 1947 constitution as marriage was for heterosexual unions only, making the same-sex marriage ban lawful.

Japan is the only International Group of Seven (G7) country that does not recognise same-sex marriage. Human Rights Watch put out a dispatch highlighting how the other G7 countries are encouraging Japan to enact laws to allow same-sex marriage, counter discrimination and uphold protections for sexual and gender minorities. Prior to the May summit in 2023, LGBTQ groups called for Japan’s government to legalise same-sex marriage and while support for the LGBTQ community grows and the Japanese Diet, Japan’s national legislature, passed the Act on Promotion of Public Understanding of Diversity of Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity, promoting understanding of the LGBTQ.

Amnesty International indicated in a report that protections for sexual and gender minorities are still absent. Currently, in Japan, same-sex couples have some recognition from local governments, such as “partnership certificates,” offering some rights, but these do not give rights such as inheritance, spousal visits or parental recognition.

0

North Dakota Senate rejects resolution asking Supreme Court to overturn gay marriage ruling

*This is being reported by NBC.

The North Dakota Senate on Thursday rejected a measure that would have asked the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn its landmark 2015 ruling that legalized same-sex marriage nationwide.

A vote to approve would have made North Dakota the first state to make such an overture to the high court, after the state House passed the measure last month.

The resolution failed in a 16-31 Senate vote after about 10 minutes of debate.

Democratic Sen. Josh Boschee said in opposition, “I understand that this puts us all in a tough spot, but I ask you to think about who’s put in the toughest position with this resolution: the people of North Dakota who are the subject of the resolution … the gay and lesbian North Dakotans who did not ask to be the subject of this conversation, but the conversation was brought to us.”

Republican Sen. David Clemens supported the measure, saying that while the U.S. Constitution does not mention marriage, the North Dakota Constitution recognizes marriage as between a man and a woman. Clemens said he took an oath to uphold that document.

Several people in the gallery applauded when the measure’s defeat was announced.

Massachusetts-based MassResistance pushed the measure and ones in other states. The group called itself an “international pro-family group.” But it has been labeled an “anti-LGBTQ hate group” by the LGBTQ advocacy organization GLAAD.

Lawmakers in at least nine states have recently introduced measures to try to chip away at same-sex couples’ right to marry. Five of them, including North Dakota’s failed resolution, urge the Supreme Court to overturn its 2015 landmark same-sex marriage ruling.

0

North Dakota Legislature close to asking Supreme Court to undo landmark gay marriage ruling

*This is reported by NBC.

North Dakota lawmakers are on the verge of making their state the first to tell the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn its decade-old ruling that legalized same-sex marriage nationwide.

Similar efforts — which would not have any direct sway with the nation’s top courts — have been introduced in a handful of states this year. North Dakota’s resolution passed the Republican-led House in February but still requires Senate approval, which is not assured.

“The original Supreme Court ruling in 2015 went totally against the Tenth Amendment, went totally against the North Dakota Constitution and North Dakota Century Code (state laws),” sponsor Republican Rep. Bill Tveit said. “Why did I introduce it? Every one of us in this building took an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States and the state.”

When the Legislature considers such resolutions, attorney and North Dakota National Guard member Laura Balliet said she wonders why she stays in her home state. The measure makes her feel unwanted, unwelcome and judged because of who she is, she said. She married her wife in 2020.

“I don’t know what this resolution does other than to tell people like myself, my friends and my family that we’re not welcome here, and I’m angry about that because I want to be welcome here. This is my home,” Balliet told the Senate panel that heard the measure on Wednesday — one in a stream of opponents who testified against it.

A push across states

Massachusetts-based MassResistance, which describes itself as an “international pro-family group” but has been labeled “anti-LGBTQ hate group” by the LGBTQ advocacy organization GLAAD, is pushing the resolution across the country.

Massachusetts became the first state to recognize same-sex marriage, in 2004. Over the next 11 years, most states began to recognize it through laws, ballot measures or court decisions before the Supreme Court made it legal nationwide.

Outside of Idaho and North Dakota, the measures have not progressed far, according to an analysis of legislation collected by the bill-tracking service Plural.

By contrast, there have been additional protections for same-sex marriage over the years, including a federal law in 2022. Since 2020, California, Colorado, Hawaii and Nevada have repealed old constitutional amendments that defined marriage as being allowed only between a man and a woman, and Virginia lawmakers advanced a similar measure this year. It could be on the ballot there in 2026.

Differing views

The North Dakota measure states that the Legislature “rejects” the 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges decision and urges the U.S. Supreme Court “to overturn the decision and leave unaddressed the natural definition of marriage as a union between one man, a biological male, and one woman, a biological female.”

In the court’s 2022 ruling that overturned the constitutional right to an abortion, Justice Clarence Thomas said the court should reconsider its precedents in the marriage decision and other past cases.

Soon after the measure passed the North Dakota House last month, several Republican state reps who voted for it stated they meant to vote no or regretted voting yes.

Republican Rep. Matt Ruby said he wished he had voted against the measure, saying his yes vote was for a different intent he realized wasn’t going to happen. The vote sent a bad message “that your marriage isn’t valid and you’re not welcome,” Ruby said. He said he supports the right for same-sex couples to be married.

Republican Rep. Dwight Kiefert said he voted for the resolution because of his Christian faith and that the institution of marriage was established in the Bible in the Garden of Eden between Adam and Eve.

‘Slap in the face’

The measure is a slap in the face to North Dakotans who are happily married and invested in their state, said Democratic Sen. Ryan Braunberger, who is gay and sits on the Senate panel that heard the resolution. The measure sends a dangerous message as North Dakota wants to grow its population and expand economically, he said.

“We want to make sure that we bring everybody in the best of the crop, and that runs the gamut of all sorts of different races, ethnicities, sexual orientations through that,” Braunberger said.

The measure is a declaration, if passed, that lawmakers would want to define marriage through what is arguably a religious lens, which dangerously gets close to infringing upon the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution, said Cody Schuler, advocacy manager for the American Civil Liberties Union’s North Dakota chapter.

“Marriage defined as ‘one man, one woman’ is a particular religious view. It is not held by all religions, all societies or by nonreligious people, and so therefore it is dangerous to be making that kind of statement because it puts legislators on record as to how they might vote on law, on a binding law versus this nonbinding resolution,” Schuler said.

0

10 Unique And Safe Places To Get Married If You’re Gay

Check out this slideshow put together and posted to MSN.

While some places still make same-sex marriage complicated (or even illegal), others celebrate it fully, offering welcoming venues and stunning locations for your big day. If you’re looking for somewhere unique, safe, and unforgettable to say “I do,” these destinations offer the perfect mix of charm, romance, and friendliness toward the queer community.

The cities mentioned in the slideshow are:

Amsterdam Netherlands

Queenstown New Zealand

Toronto Canada

Cape Town South Africa

Reykjavik Iceland

Barcelona Spain

Valleta Malta

Sydney Australia

Mexico City Mexico

Copenhagen Denmark

Each town on the slide deck has a short excerpt about why the author included them. Be sure to read it.

Also be sure to check out our world map for more info on moving to various countries.

0

Marriage equality bills filed to protect same-sex marriage in North Carolina

*Reported by WWAY News

North Carolina State Representative Deb Butler (D–New Hanover), one of the first openly gay members of the state House, has filed two bills aimed at securing marriage equality and protecting LGBTQ+ families in the state.

The proposals – H174 and H175 – come as lawmakers brace for potential challenges to same-sex marriage rights amid a shifting federal judiciary.

H174 seeks to repeal North Carolina’s outdated ban on same-sex marriage, a statute that remains on the books despite being rendered unenforceable by the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2015 ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges. If enacted, the bill would affirm the federal protections of all married couples, regardless of gender.

H175 would introduce a constitutional amendment explicitly safeguarding marriage equality in North Carolina. The amendment is designed as a long-term shield, ensuring that even if the Supreme Court revisits Obergefell, LGBTQ+ families will remain protected from discriminatory state-level policies.

“In North Carolina, we must defend the rights of our LGBTQ+ citizens,” Rep. Butler said. “Marriage equality is a settled issue for the vast majority of Americans, and our state should reflect that reality. These bills are about ensuring dignity, security and legal protection for all families in the face of uncertainty at the federal level.”

According to a news release, Butler’s initiative is part of a broader effort to fortify civil rights protections across North Carolina. Advocates, legal experts and LGBTQ+ organizations have voiced strong support for the bills, emphasizing the urgent need for state-level safeguards amid a volatile national political climate.

The legislation now heads to the North Carolina General Assembly.

0

Republicans in 9 states are pushing measures to end same-sex marriage rights

*This was published by LGBTNation.com

Nine states are now seeing Republican efforts to overturn Obergefell v. Hodges, the 2015 Supreme Court decision that legalized marriage equality in all 50 states. This is a new trend; state Republican lawmakers have been focused on rolling back trans rights since 2020.

In five of the states — Idaho, Michigan, Montana, North Dakota, and South Dakota — Republican lawmakers have introduced resolutions calling for the Supreme Court to overturn Obergefell. Those measures have been passed by at least one chamber of the state legislature in Idaho and North Dakota.

In the four other states – Missouri, Oklahoma, Tennessee, and Texas – Republican legislators have introduced bills to privilege heterosexual marriages, with some of the states referring to a new institution called “covenant marriage,” which would be limited to heterosexual couples. The point there, according to the sponsor of one such bill in Oklahoma, is to create inequality in marriage rights between opposite- and same-sex couples and invite a legal challenge that could be taken to the Supreme Court to overturn Obergefell.

Two justices on the Supreme Court have openly stated that they want to overturn Obergefell, and the Court has moved to the right since 2015. Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Anthony Kennedy, and Stephen Breyer were all in the Obergefell majority but have either retired or passed away in the last ten years. Only one was replaced by a Democratic president. It is not clear if there are the five votes needed to protect marriage equality on the Court if it were to take up a test case.

Thirty-five states have amendments or statutes banning same-sex marriage, and most would likely go into effect if the Supreme Court were to overturn Obergefell. Because of the 2022 federal Respect for Marriage Act, though, state and federal governments would have to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states.

“It’s good to anticipate things that could happen in order that we do our best job preparing ourselves,” Jenny Pizer, chief legal officer of Lambda Legal, told LGBTQ Nation last month. “The bottom line for people is that, if there are things that you can do to secure your relationships, your family status and to take other protective measures, please do those things. Don’t be lulled into complacency by our informed and reasonably expert speculation about what may happen.”

0

Michigan lawmaker urges US Supreme Court to overturn gay marriage ruling

*This is being reported by FOX 2 Detroit.

The Brief

    • Michigan Rep. Josh Schriver is proposing a resolution that would urge the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn the ruling that legalized same-sex marriage nationwide.
    • Schriver says allowing gay marriage has led to “religious persecution” and goes against “the sanctity of marriage.”
    • Gay marriage is banned in Michigan’s constitution, but is allowed due to the 2015 Supreme Court ruling that Schriver and the resolution’s co-sponsors wish to overturn.

LANSING, Mich. (FOX 2) – A Michigan lawmaker plans to introduce a resolution to the state House of Representatives, urging the United States Supreme Court to overturn Obergefell v. Hodges, the case that legalized same-sex marriage nationwide.

Rep. Josh Schriver (R-Oxford), along with 12 co-sponsors, will introduce the House resolution following Tuesday’s session.

The backstory:

The resolution comes after Schriver posted on social media late in 2024 that gay marriage should be banned.

“America only ‘accepted’ gay marriage after it was thrusted into her by a perverted Supreme Court ruling,” he wrote in part on X. “Make gay marriage illegal again. This is not remotely controversial or extreme.”

Schriver doubled down on what he said in a statement, where he wrote that gay marriage offends God. 

In a release announcing the new resolution, Schriver wrote that Obergefell v. Hodges “is at odds with the sanctity of marriage, the Michigan Constitution, and the principles upon which the country was established.”

Without the Obergefill ruling, gay marriage would be illegal in Michigan due to an amendment voters passed in 2004. However, the Supreme Court decision supersedes that. 

Schriver went on to reference what he called “religious persecution” since the 2015 ruling, including a wedding venue that was fined for turning away an LGBTQ couple, and Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel attempting to ban adoption agencies from turning away same-sex couples for religious reasons. However, a judge later ruled that faith-based adoption agencies can turn away prospective parents because they are LGBTQ.

What they’re saying:

Fears that the Supreme Court may take another look at the ruling and overturn it arose after Roe v. Wade was overturned, and has increased as lawmakers begin introducing legislation aimed at the landmark case.

Lawmakers in other states, including Idaho, Montana, North Dakota, and South Dakota, have also been pushing the Supreme Court to revisit the ruling and overturn it. 

The new resolution received pushback from Democrats, with state Democratic Party Chair Curtis Hertel releasing a statement condemning the resolution:

“Unfortunately, this isn’t a surprise coming from Josh Schriver and the right-wing extremists that populate Matt Hall’s Republican caucus – and it’s deeply dangerous. Schriver is attacking hundreds of thousands of Michiganders who are nurses, teachers, soldiers, and beloved members of the community.

“From spreading racist conspiracy theories to homophobic rhetoric, Schriver does not deserve to serve the people of Michigan, let alone sit on a politically motivated oversight committee in the state House. Thankfully, I know that Democrats will continue to fight for Michiganders’ civil rights and personal freedoms in the face of these ugly attacks.”

Gay marriage in Michigan

Because Michigan voters banned gay marriage in 2004, legalizing the practice would first require voters to remove the ban from the state constitution via ballot proposal.

Lawmakers have been pushing to codify same-sex marriage to protect it if Obergefell were to be overturned.

Under the existing amendment, if Obergefell were to be overturned, existing marriages in Michigan would be recognized, but future LGBTQ+ marriages would be banned, said Rep. Jason Morgan (D-Ann Arbor).

A similar scenario played out in 2022 when nationwide abortion was removed following a Supreme Court ruling. The overturning of that ruling allowed states to decide if they would allow abortions. Michigan had an existing abortion ban that was lifted after voters passed a proposal to allow the procedure.

After the Roe ruling, Justice Clarence Thomas said that the Supreme Court should reconsider rulings that legalized same-sex marriage and protected same-sex relationships, creating fear in states that don’t have protections in place.

0

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑