Federal marriage amendment rises again

By BTL Staff

WASHINGTON – An amendment to the United States Constitution that would deny marriage and likely civil union and domestic partnership rights to same-sex couples was introduced in the House March 17.
Introduced by California Republican Dan Lungren, the bill, called the Defense of Marriage Amendment, would have the same effects as last year's failed amendment.
Lungren cited the notion of "activist judges" as his rationale for the amendment. "It is increasingly apparent that marriage itself has become vulnerable to the design of judges who have seen fit to take upon themselves the authority to engage in social engineering aimed at the redefinition of this foundational societal institution," he said. "Such judicial intolerance is an act of lawlessness and must not be allowed to stand."
According to Lungren, the amendment would define marriage in the United States as a legal union of one man and one woman, expressly prohibit the judicial branch from redefining marriage as anything other than a union between one man and one woman, and incorporating language to prohibit the courts from imposing the policy of one state on other states in order to make the Defense of Marriage Act constitutional.
California Assemblyman Mark Leno (D-San Francisco) voiced concerns about the bill's eradication of judicial review. "This is a significant departure from the way business has been in this country for a couple of hundred years," he told the San Francisco Bee March 18.
The bill was also denounced by LGBT rights groups and allied organizations.
"Not only would this amendment trample the rights of millions of same-sex couples and their children, but it would also deny any state the ability to ensure its families are protected under state law," said Human Rights Campaign Vice President of Policy David M. Smith.
"Americans don't want the Constitution turned into a tool for discrimination," said Smith. "Congress should be spending its time protecting families, not ensuring their vulnerability under law."
"Discrimination has no place in our Constitution or our public institutions," said H. Alexander Robinson, strategic director of the National Black Justice Coalition. "The U.S. Constitution has long been held to recognize individual dignity. We must not allow bigotry, fear and prejudice to undermine this critical American value."
The bill reads: "Marriage in the United States shall consist only of a legal union of a man and a woman. No court of the United States or of any State shall have jurisdiction to determine whether this Constitution or the constitution of any State requires that the legal incidents of marriage be conferred upon any union other than a legal union between one man and one woman. No State shall be required to give effect to any public act, record or judicial proceeding of any other State concerning a union between persons of the same sex that is treated as a marriage, or as having the legal incidents of marriage, under the laws of such other State."
If passed, it would mark the first time the Constitution was amended to single out a group of Americans for unequal treatment. According to exit polling in November 2004, 60 percent of Americans support either civil unions or marriage equality for same-sex couples.