{"bills":[{"photos":{"featured":"https://assets.causes.com/bill/photo/hjres32-114/featured_marriage-protection-amendment-1454547464.jpg","featured_large":"https://assets.causes.com/bill/photo/hjres32-114/featured_large_marriage-protection-amendment-1454547464.jpg","shareable":"https://n.causes.com/share-images/bills/hjres32-114.png"},"introduced_on":"2015-02-12","title_override":"Should The Constitution Be Amended To Only Recognize Heterosexual Marriages?","summary_override":"

This resolution would amend the Constitution to define marriage as a union only between a man and a woman.

Passed in 1996, the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) allowed states to not acknowledge same-sex unions officiated in other states that don't limit marriage to heterosexual unions. In 2013's United States v. Windsor, the Supreme Court ruled that the previous federal ban on same-sex marriage was unconstitutional due to the “Equal Protection Clause” in the Constitution.

This amendment would nullify the U.S. v. Windsor ruling, by mandating that \"neither this Constitution, nor the constitution of any State,\" be required to bestow marriage benefits on any same-sex couple.

Update 6/26/2015:

A case heard by the Supreme Court in April 2015 — Obergefell v. Hodges — dealt with whether the Equal Protection Clause requires states to provide marriage licenses to same-sex couples, and whether they must recognize same-sex marriages performed out-of-state. In a 5 to 4 ruling, the Supreme Court effectively legalized same-sex marriage nationwide. The only recourse remaining to those opposing same-sex marriages would be a constitutional amendment such as this or other proposals.

","official_title":"Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relating to marriage.","short_title":"Marriage Protection Amendment","popular_title":null,"short_summary":"Constitutional Amendment \n\n Marriage Protection Amendment \n\n Defines marriage in the United States as consisting only of the union of a man and a woman. Prohibits either the U.S. Constitution or the constitution of any state from being construed to require that marriage or the legal incidents of marriage be conferred upon any other union.","summarized":true,"cost":null,"cost_commentary":"A CBO cost estimate is unavailable. However, a CBO cost estimate of a 2004 version of this bill — H.R. 3313 — found that implementation would have no impact on the federal budget.","impact":"Married couples, people who want to get married, the LGBT community, states that recognize same-sex marriages, federal marriage benefits, and the U.S. wedding industry.","argument_for":"States need to have the right to decide which marriages they choose to recognize, and consequently, give benefits to. ","argument_against":"It’s the 21st century people; this bill aims to deny the LGBT community their civil rights that have already been granted in many U.S. states.","bill_type":"hjres","published":true,"type":"FederalBill","id":"hjres32-114","bill_id":"hjres32-114","formal_id":"H. Joint Res. 32","chamber":"house","congress":114,"last_action_at":"2015-02-12T00:00:00.000Z","active":false,"enacted":false,"enacted_at":null,"vetoed":false,"last_vote_at":null,"debated_on":null,"congress_url":"https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th/house-joint-resolution/32","plain_text_url":"http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-114hjres32ih/html/BILLS-114hjres32ih.htm","shareable_image_url":"https://n.causes.com/share-images/bills/hjres32-114.png","congress_full_text_url":"https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th/house-joint-resolution/32/text","is_current_congress":false,"last_version_on":"2015-02-12","related_bill_ids":[],"progress":"Introduced","house_passage_result":false,"senate_passage_result":false,"position_count":4008,"committees":[{"name":"Committee on the Judiciary","chamber":"house","committee_id":"HSJU","subcommittee":false}],"links":{"rollCalls":"/api/roll_calls?bill_id=hjres32-114","details":"/api/bills/hjres32-114/details","sharingMessage":"/api/sharing_messages/hjres32-114","positionsFor":"/api/bills/hjres32-114/positions/for","positionsAgainst":"/api/bills/hjres32-114/positions/against"},"upcoming":false,"cosponsors_count":37,"slug":"hjres32-114-marriage-protection-amendment","latest_chamber_votes_id":null,"official_url":null,"target_video":true,"following":false,"vote_count":32240,"yea_vote_count":5172,"nay_vote_count":27035,"passed_house":false,"passed_senate":false,"vote_id":null,"my_position_id":null,"topic_ids":["civil-rights","legal-affairs","families"],"issue_ids":["civil-rights","legal-affairs","families"],"sponsor_id":379}],"votes":[],"issues":[{"id":"civil-rights","name":"Civil Rights","slug":"civil-rights","description":"Federal legislation related to Civil Rights protections and can encompass: abortion, age discrimination, voting rights, women’s rights, racial and ethnic relations. Make your voice heard about the issues you care about. ","page_title":"Civil Rights legislation encompassing discrimination, privacy and the first amendment - Vote on Bills, Stay informed, Hold Your Reps Accountable","icons":{"black":"https://assets.causes.com/issue/icon/civil-rights/black_civil-rights-1429042036.svg","grey":"https://assets.causes.com/issue/icon/civil-rights/grey_civil-rights-1429042036.svg","white":"https://assets.causes.com/issue/icon/civil-rights/white_civil-rights-1429042036.svg"},"cover_image_url":null,"is_following":false},{"id":"legal-affairs","name":"Legal Affairs","slug":"legal-affairs","description":"The US Congress regulates many aspects of American Legal Affairs, including: the US Federal Courts(Appellate and District), Judges, the US Supreme Court, Civil Action, The Constitution and Constitutional Amendments.","page_title":"US Federal legislation related to Legal Affairs, including the Constitution and the Supreme Court - Vote on Bills, Stay informed, Hold Your Reps Accountable","icons":{"black":"https://assets.causes.com/issue/icon/legal-affairs/black_legal-affairs-1429042044.svg","grey":"https://assets.causes.com/issue/icon/legal-affairs/grey_legal-affairs-1429042044.svg","white":"https://assets.causes.com/issue/icon/legal-affairs/white_legal-affairs-1429042044.svg"},"cover_image_url":null,"is_following":false},{"id":"families","name":"Families","slug":"families","description":"Congressional legislation related to Families encompassing a wide variety of potential subjects, including: adoption child care, child safety, domestic violence and abuse, marriage, divorce and teenage pregnancy.","page_title":"Federal legislation related to Families - Vote on Bills, Stay informed, Hold Your Reps Accountable","icons":{"black":"https://assets.causes.com/issue/icon/families/black_families-1429042038.svg","grey":"https://assets.causes.com/issue/icon/families/grey_families-1429042038.svg","white":"https://assets.causes.com/issue/icon/families/white_families-1429042038.svg"},"cover_image_url":null,"is_following":false}],"users":[{"name":"Joshua","vote_count":28,"photos":{"large":"https://graph.facebook.com/10207860011434128/picture?width=150&height=150","small":"https://graph.facebook.com/10207860011434128/picture?width=75&height=75","tiny":"https://graph.facebook.com/10207860011434128/picture?width=20&height=20","facebook":"https://graph.facebook.com/10207860011434128/picture"},"links":{"following":"/api/users/LWgMdjkm/following","followers":"/api/users/LWgMdjkm/followers"},"about_me":null,"twitter_id":null,"facebook_id":null,"youtube_id":null,"google_plus_id":null,"website":null,"slug":null,"issue_count":24,"is_following":null,"influence_score":10,"influence_level":10,"follower_count":0,"following_count":2,"position_count":3,"id":"LWgMdjkm","partner_id":null}],"bill_position":{"flagged":false,"id":"f8e7850d-f711-4575-a987-115505f9b620","argument_for":null,"argument_against":"The Supreme Court has already decided this issue. Public opinion has shifted dramatically. It's time to move on. Our country should set an example of openness, diversity, and tolerance. Efforts like these set us back and divide us. ","show_argument_for":false,"show_argument_against":true,"upvote_count":0,"upvotes_for_count":null,"upvotes_against_count":0,"has_upvoted":false,"endorsement_count":0,"links":{"self":"https://www.causes.com/positions/f8e7850d-f711-4575-a987-115505f9b620"},"body":"The Supreme Court has already decided this issue. Public opinion has shifted dramatically. It's time to move on. Our country should set an example of openness, diversity, and tolerance. Efforts like these set us back and divide us. ","stance":"nay","created_at":"2016-03-02T06:10:56.858Z","shareable_image_url":"https://n.causes.com/share-images/positions/f8e7850d-f711-4575-a987-115505f9b620.png","note_color":null,"note_text":null,"bill_id":"hjres32-114","user_id":"LWgMdjkm","endorser_ids":[]}}

Like Causes?

Joshua

Should The Constitution Be Amended To Only Recognize Heterosexual Marriages?