It's a pretty weak bill:
The new bill would still require those states to recognize marriages from states where marriage equality is legal, but would not require states to allow same-sex couples to apply for marriage licenses within their borders.
“The federal government would still be required to respect same-sex couples’ already-existing marriages, as would other states in many circumstances,” reads an explainer on the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) website. “But a state that wanted to get out of the business of issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples would not violate the Respect for Marriage Act.”
These states would have to recognize any standing marriages, but they wouldn't ever need to issue a new one. So no one's marriage is going to get undone, but if you're in a red state, you won't be able to marry who you want anymore.
Edit: I should be clear. The passing of this bill will not lead to any rollback of marriage rights. But in the event of the SC going back on gay or interracial marriage, states will be able to partially roll back what they allow. Not completely, but somewhat.
:PSL:
These states would have to recognize any standing marriages, but they wouldn’t ever need to issue a new one.
This is functionally how every marriage has ever worked. You don't need to get re-married if you move from California to Texas. Crazy that its even up for debate to handle things otherwise.
Also, its not clear how this legislation would actually stop a repeal of Obergefell, since Obergefell v. Kasich was exactly such an instance - couple married in Maryland and demanded Ohio recognize the union.
SCOTUS could still just say "States have no obligation to recognize out-of-state marriages due to the Bunga-Bunga Clause of the NoHomo Act of 1488, The Bible, and also this collection of poems by Chauncer."
There's a loophole where they have to recognize out-of-state marriages, so if you get married in a state without a residency requiremen your home state will still have to recognize it. That's still bullshit, though.
The federal government would still be required to respect same-sex couples’ already-existing marriages, as would other states in many circumstances
"Many" circumstances means there are some exceptions where they are allowed to not recognize them?
thank fuck. this shit is an extremely weak compromise, but it legitimately is still something and can be built on further
Can't wait for the parliamentarian to jam this up somehow.
that's only for budget reconciliation bills which need 50 votes. 60 votes regular bills can be anything
How soon before the Chudpreme Court says this is U N C O N S T I T U T I O N A L? :frothingfash:
