Connect with us

News

35 States Still Have Same-Sex Marriage Bans on the Books – Dems Say Same-Sex Marriage Bill Has Enough Votes to Pass

Published

on

Democrats and Republicans working to pass a limited same-sex marriage protection bill say they have enough votes to avoid a 60-vote filibuster. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer has announced the legislation will hit the floor Wednesday.

“We have the votes” to overcome a filibuster on the Senate’s same-sex marriage protection bill, a “source close to negotiations” told HuffPost Monday.

Despite the U.S. Supreme Court striking down bans on same-sex marriage in its landmark 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges ruling, 35 states still have marriage equality bans “in their constitutions, state law, or both,” according to a Pew Charitable Trusts’ Stateline report in July.

Supporters of same-sex marriage want the Senate to act quickly, given U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas has encouraged marriage equality opponents to bring cases that could allow the Court to strike down its ruling in Obergefell. As many Americans learned this summer when the Court struck down its 49-year old ruling in Roe v. Wade, laws that remain on the books can go back into effect immediately.

READ MORE: Katie Hobbs Projected Winner as Kari Lake Launches Election Denial Attacks

CNN’s Manu Raju adds that U.S. Senator Tammy Baldwin, the bill’s lead Democratic sponsor, “told me they have enough votes to break a filibuster.”

Senator Thom Tillis (R-NC), “says there are the 10 republican votes needed to pass the Senate bill to codify federal protections for same sex marriage,” NBC News’ Frank Thorp V tweeted on Monday.

Contrary to some reports, however, the legislation does not “codify” Obergefell.

The bill, officially the Respect for Marriage Act, protects both same-sex and interracial marriages. It is very narrow and does not require states to allow same-sex couples to marry, but merely requires the federal government and states to recognize same-sex marriages. States would be required to honor the marriages of same-sex couples if their marriage was legal at the time they were married. In other words, if a state bans same-sex marriage it will be required to fully honor any marriage of a same-sex couple from its own state or another state, and cannot void existing marriages.

READ MORE: ‘Coup-Plotters Reunion’: Experts Warn After Group Including Ginni Thomas Calls for House, Senate Leadership Elections Delay

It also repeals DOMA, the Defense of Marriage Act of 1996 that originally banned the federal government from recognizing same-sex marriages. The U.S. Supreme Court struck down that portion in 2013, in the famous United States v. Windsor case brought by LGBTQ hero Edie Windsor.

Democrats want to pass the Respect for Marriage Act before the next Congress, especially if Republicans win the House majority. A House version passed with nearly four dozen GOP votes this past summer, although 157 Republicans voted against it.

Several Senate Republicans still oppose the bill, with one, Marco Rubio of Florida, having called it a “stupid waste of time.”

In July, exposing the large number of Republicans opposed to marriage equality, U.S. Senator Ben Sasse of Nebraska, considered a “moderate” Republican, blasted Speaker Nancy Pelosi after the Respect for Marriage Act passed the House.

“Is there a single case about it?” he asked, according to NBC News’ Thorpe. “I’m not not answering questions that are about hypotheticals that are just Pelosi trying to divide America with culture wars. I think it’s just the same bullshit. She’s not an adult.”

Nearly half the GOP Senate caucus refused to even respond to CNN’s polling this summer.

READ MORE: ‘Fraud’: Legal Expert Stunned After Trump Appears to Admit He Used DOJ to Interfere in Florida’s 2018 Election

Some Republicans seemed more likely to support the bill after Democrats added an amendment stating the legislation does not legalize polygamy, which Republicans have historically falsely equated with same-sex marriage. The bill also does not restrict religious rights.

The amendment, according to Senator Baldwin, protects “all religious liberty and conscience protections available under the Constitution or Federal law, including but not limited to the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, and prevents this bill from being used to diminish or repeal any such protection.”

It also “Confirms that non-profit religious organizations will not be required to provide any services, facilities, or goods for the solemnization or celebration of a marriage.”

 

 

There's a reason 10,000 people subscribe to NCRM. You can get the news before it breaks just by subscribing, plus you can learn something new every day.
Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

Trump Envoy Invites Kids in Greenland to Come to America for Chocolate Chip Cookies

Published

on

President Donald Trump’s Special Envoy to Greenland, Louisiana Republican Governor Jeff Landry, touched down in Nuuk on Sunday, saying he arrived “simply to build relationships,” and to “see if there are opportunities” to expand them.

The U.S. Ambassador to Denmark, Ken Howery, arrived on Monday to take part in this week’s Future Greenland 2026 conference. Landry is also expected to attend.

President Donald Trump has suggested the U.S. should take over Greenland. The New York Times reports that negotiators from the U.S., Greenland, and Denmark, have been in talks about Greenland’s future. Greenland and Denmark have been adamant that the U.S. cannot acquire Greenland.

The vast majority of Greenlanders, who are part of the Kingdom of Denmark, have said they do not want to be acquired by the United States. Denmark has also stated Greenland’s future is not up for negotiation, and several European leaders have stressed that the United States cannot interfere with Greenland — with at least one, Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen, warning that if Trump were to engage in a military incursion it would mean the end of NATO.

“I would like to make a deal,” Trump told reporters in January.

“You know, the easy way, but if we don’t do it the easy way we’re gonna do it the hard way,” the president said.

In March, Danish public broadcaster DR, via a Google translation, reported that Trump’s remarks, when he threatened that the U.S. could acquire Greenland the easy way or the hard way, had accelerated the governments’ plans.

Denmark had formed an alliance with France, Germany, Norway, and Sweden, flew heavily armed Danish F-35 fighter jets and troops to Greenland with bombs to blow up its own runways if necessary to prevent U.S. aircraft from landing, and prepared for casualties by flying bags of blood to the autonomous territory of roughly 56,000 residents.

On Monday, according to video posted by Orla Joelsen, a native Greenlander and a prison official in Nuuk, the GOP governor spoke with some local children.

“If you come to Louisiana,” Governor Landry says in the video, “and you come to the governor’s mansion — all the chocolate chip cookies you can eat.”

 

Image via Shutterstock

 

Continue Reading

News

Trump Obsessed With Self-Enrichment as ‘Little Man’ Pays the Price: Columnist

Published

on

President Donald Trump remains “obsessively focused” on “personal glory and enrichment” — ignoring the economic suffering of the working people he last week dismissed as the “little man,” Jeet Heer writes in The Nation.

“Donald Trump is annoyed that he can’t celebrate the massive profits oil companies are making due to the war he launched in the Middle East,” writes Heer, The Nation’s national affairs correspondent. Trump would be “exulting in the hundreds of billions of dollars produced by skyrocketing oil prices—if it weren’t for the pesky fact that it comes at the expense of ordinary Americans.”

Americans are paying roughly 40 percent more at the gas pump than they did before Trump started his war in Iran three months ago, Heer notes. But in an interview with Fox News’ Sean Hannity last week, Trump said, “I don’t want to say we’re making a fortune, you understand that? Because if I say that, they’re going to say ‘oh, he forgets about the little man with the $4 gasoline.’”

Meanwhile, Republicans’ response “to the harm caused by Trump’s policies” is not to change course “or even to appear sympathetic about their effects,” but rather, “to express their total indifference to the suffering of the American people.”

Heer looks at a Bloomberg report from last week that revealed Trump or his financial advisors made over 3,700 trades during the first quarter of this year, “a flurry totaling tens of millions of dollars and involving major companies that have dealings with his administration.”

Trump won the White House — twice — by promoting a message of economic populism, but that has gone by the wayside. Heer writes: “allowing Trump to steal the rhetoric of economic populism” was one of “the most catastrophic mistakes” Democrats have made in the last decade.

Now, Trump is making the same messaging error Biden did — an error that cost Democrats the White House in 2024. But that error opens the door for Democrats to “reclaim economic populism” as their own message.

Citing the “apocryphal words misattributed to the French Queen Marie Antoinette: ‘Let them eat cake,’” Heer writes that Trump said: “I don’t think about Americans’ financial situation. I don’t think about anybody. I think about one thing: We cannot let Iran have a nuclear weapon. That’s all.”

 

Image via Reuters 

Continue Reading

News

Why Even the MAGA Far Right Has Turned on Neil Gorsuch: Political Scientist

Published

on

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch’s book tour was met with staunch criticism by the far-right, but underneath the anger, political scientist Daniel Ruggles writes, was a critical revelation: the conservative movement is split between hard-right MAGA nativists and mainstream constitutionalists.

Writing at The Bulwark, Ruggles notes that at his core, Justice Gorsuch — like all conservatives to varying degrees on the Roberts Supreme Court, is an originalist: he believes the constitution should be interpreted as it was understood when written.

But the MAGA hard right has not embraced originalism, and, Ruggles writes, “originalism’s slow seep into both conservative and mainstream constitutional law will not be easily undone.”

“Fundamentally, originalists accept the democratic constraints of the Constitution and believe them to be a core component of America’s political tradition,” Ruggles writes. “Postliberals and their nativist fellow travelers” — MAGA, for example — “have begun to reimagine the American state without any such constitutional guardrails.”

Gorsuch’s book tour enraged MAGA because he kept focusing on “creed.”

“The United States is a ‘creedal’ nation—that is, a nation unified by common belief in rights, liberties, and democratic institutions,” Ruggles writes.

Gorsuch explained that Americans share a “heritage,” but, Ruggles said, “it’s one of ideals, not ethnicity. Being an American requires not lineage, but belief.”

“It was a gentle rebuke of nationalism—and it drove the hard right nuts,” Ruggles wrote.

Ruggles added that the “clash over an American ‘creed’ portends something dark as well, to the degree it shows deep tensions between the extremist, illiberal right and its originalist predecessors.”

The MAGA hard right is rising, and has sought “key privileges in the Trump presidency,” Ruggles explains, while originalists have a “critical institutional advantage on the bench of the Supreme Court and other courts” that insulates them from MAGA’s populism.

“Who wins this battle,” Ruggles warns, “will fundamentally redefine America.”

 

Image via Reuters 

 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2026 AlterNet Media.