The Respect for Marriage Act is the attempt by Congress to guarantee the right to same-sex marriage, and since recent national surveys show that support for marriage equality is at an all-time high, the bill has a possibility of receiving the sixty votes it needs in the Senate to become a law.
According to David Stacy, director of government affairs for the Human Rights Campaign, which assisted lawmakers in the drafting of the RFMA, “We truly think we have a shot to get this done.” [citation needed] I have not been made aware of any significant issues regarding any of these provisions.
Stacy explains to PEOPLE that the RFMA would help to achieve several significant objectives.
The Defense of Marriage Act, which was passed in 1996 and states that the federal government will not recognise any same-sex marriages that are performed by states, would be repealed if this bill were to become law.
This would be the most significant change. (The Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) is currently not enforceable as a result of two landmark decisions made by the Supreme Court: United States v. Windsor and Obergefell v. Hodges.
However, DOMA does still exist on paper, which means that it could be reinstated if those rulings were overturned by the current court’s conservative majority.
It is essential to have an understanding of the powers that Congress possesses and those that it does not possess to comprehend the remaining provisions of the RFMA.
The states hold the ultimate power in this matter, second only to the Supreme Court; therefore, this law can’t compel state governments to award same-sex couples state-level marriage benefits or issue marriage licences to same-sex couples.
However, Congress can exercise its power under the full confidence and credit clause of the Constitution by mandating that all states recognise marriage licences, adoption orders, and divorce decrees that were issued in other states.
The “location of celebration” in a marriage is now officially recognised as a factor in determining whether or not a couple is qualified for certain government benefits.
In other words, the location of the couple’s wedding is more important than their current address for determining whether or not a couple is eligible for federal benefits.
They would still be recognised as spouses by the federal government, giving them access to top-tier benefits involving spousal leave, social security, and taxes even if they lived in a state that does not issue marriage licences to same-sex couples.
This would be the case even if the state refused to issue marriage licences to same-sex couples.
People gather in Lafayette Park on June 26, 2015, to see the White House illuminated with rainbow colours to commemorate the Supreme Court’s ruling to legalise same-sex marriage in the District of Columbia. The photo was taken from an archive.
The White House took on an entirely new appearance: rainbow-coloured lighting to honour the ruling of the Supreme Court to legalise marriage between people of the same gender throughout the country.
Stacy explains that even though the RFMA is unable to fully meet the protections of the Obergefell case, which was decided by the Supreme Court in 2015 and legalised same-sex marriage across the country, it would still be a significant step toward ensuring marriage equality over the long term.
This is due to the provisions of the RFMA as well as its statement to the rest of the world.
“We can provide evidence that both the House of Representatives and the Senate have really significant and strong support from both sides of the aisle for this, and we are aware that public support is at a level of seventy per cent. Simply put, this contributes to the goal of achieving marital equality “he argues.
“The more that we can just make this the way things are in this nation, the less incentive the Supreme Court has to muck around, the fewer challenges that will come to the court around these issues, and the more that the public is behind us,”
If the Supreme Court were to still go ahead with reconsidering the Obergefell precedent, as Justice Clarence Thomas recently suggested in his concurring opinion on the ruling to overturn Roe v. Wade, the very existence of the RFMA would give the public more firepower to push back against states that are thinking of refusing to issue marriage licences to same-sex couples.
This would be the case because the RFMA would give the public more firepower to push back against states that are thinking of overturning the Roe
Stacy says that despite its limitations, the RFMA is “the way we best protect marriage equality.”
“We think this is a positive step forward in continuing to show that this shouldn’t be a partisan issue — and isn’t a partisan issue,” she says. “We think this is a positive step forward in continuing to show that this shouldn’t be a partisan issue.”
Following a decision by the Supreme Court that same-sex couples have the legal right to marry anywhere in the United States, same-sex couples like Barb Eisenhart and Tiffany Wahl exchanged hugs before their wedding ceremony at Fountain Square on Friday, June 26, 2015, in Cincinnati.
On June 26, 2015, a couple celebrates their engagement with a heartfelt and triumphant embrace before the wedding ceremony.
The Respect for Marriage Act was approved by the House of Representatives on July 19, receiving support from 47 Republican representatives.
It will soon be brought to the floor of the Senate, where it will require the support of 10 Republican senators to meet the threshold of 60 votes and become a law.
To this point, a few Republican senators have indicated that they will vote in favour of the RFMA, while several Republican senators have stated unequivocally that they will vote against the RFMA.
The vast majority of lawmakers affiliated with the Republican Party are either remaining silent or releasing ambiguous statements that do little to clarify where they stand on the issue.
Stacy, along with other lawmakers and organisations fighting to enact this crucial legislation, stays optimistic despite the lack of clarity concerning the mindsets of senators, which is disturbing.
He says, “We still feel good that we can get to 60,” noting that in 2010 when the Senate brought a vote on repealing Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, reaching the 60-vote minimum was also uncertain.
“We still feel good that we can get to 60,” he says. The final tally was 65 votes in favour, which was enough to win.
Again in 2013, when the Employment Non-Discrimination Act was brought up for a vote in the Senate, it was not certain that the bill would pass, but ultimately it received 64 yes votes.
Within only one week, the HRC was successful in getting more than 170 firms and counting to join them in pushing Republican senators to vote by the principles held by the American people rather than the tradition held by their party.
And in a move that sends a clear message, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has chosen to remain neutral on the bill up until this point.
By doing so, he appears to be forgoing the power that he has to lobby for Republicans to oppose the bill, which gives Republican senators more freedom to vote according to their conscience.
Even though nobody knows for sure when Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer will bring the RFMA to the floor of the Senate, it may happen as soon as the following week.
The Senate will adjourn for one month beginning on August 8, and it will be up to Senate Democrats to plot whether it would be more advantageous to push for a vote right away or wait a little bit longer.
According to Stacy, “We feel at HRC that we are near enough now that we are ready at any time,” but Sen. Schumer still needs to make his own choices and sort out the floor timeline.
There is overwhelming support among Americans for the right to marry the person they love, regardless of sex, gender identity, or sexual orientation, and this support is not going away regardless of whether or not the bill is passed into law.
Read more:-
- This Week, China’s Shadow Casts a Long Shadow Over the US
- In His Speech on Religious Liberty in Rome, Samuel Alito Makes Fun of Critics of Roe V. Wade From Other Countries
- The Very First Democrat in Congress to Publicly Oppose Joe Biden’s Candidacy for President in 2024
“The support for marriage equality is so consistent across all of the polls,” Stacy says, “which is really encouraging.” “The numbers continue to move up and they are staying that way.”
