Same-sex marriage legislation in the United States
|Legal recognition of
|† Not yet in effect|
In response to court action in a number of states, the United States federal government and a number of state legislatures passed or attempted to pass legislation either prohibiting or allowing same-sex marriage or other types of same-sex unions.
Federal level 
In 1996, the United States Congress passed and President Bill Clinton signed Public Law 106-199, the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). Section 3(a) of DOMA defines "marriage" and "spouse" for purposes of both federal law and any ruling, regulation, or interpretation by an administrative bureau or agency of the United States government. The impact of Section 2(a) of DOMA, which reads as follows, is less clear.
No State, territory, or possession of the United States, or Indian tribe, shall be required to give effect to any public act, record, or judicial proceeding of any other State, territory, possession, or tribe respecting a relationship between persons of the same sex that is treated as a marriage under the laws of such other State, territory, possession, or tribe, or a right or claim arising from such relationship.
U.S. v. Windsor 
In United States v. Windsor, the Supreme Court is asked to determine whether the federal Defense of Marriage Act's definition of marriage as being between a man and a woman violates equal protection. Both cases also involve procedural issues that could see either or both of the cases dismissed without a determination on the equal protection questions involved.
State level 
Efforts to enable same-sex unions 
Votes by state legislatures to recognize various types of same-sex unions, sorted by date:
|State||Date||Type of same-sex union||Upper House||Lower house||Governor||Final
|District of Columbia||June 1992||Domestic partnership||Passed||Signed||Yes|
|California||September 1994||Domestic partnership||21||17||41||26||Vetoed||No|
|Hawaii||March 1996||Domestic partnership||14||11||Failed||n/a||No|
|Hawaii||June 1997||Reciprocal beneficiary relationship||24||7||43||27||Signed||Yes|
|California||September 1998||Domestic partnership||21||17||41||36||Vetoed||No|
|California||October 1999||Domestic partnership||23||13||41||38||Vetoed||No|
|California||October 1999||Domestic partnership||22||14||41||36||Signed||Yes|
|Vermont||April 2000||Civil union||19||11||79||68||Signed||Yes|
|California||August 2001||Domestic partnership (expansion)||22||12||41||27||Signed||Yes|
|California||October 2001||Domestic partnership (expansion)||23||11||41||32||Signed||Yes|
|California||September 2002||Domestic partnership (expansion)||26||11||41||31||Signed||Yes|
|California||September 2002||Domestic partnership (expansion)||23||13||43||27||Signed||Yes|
|California||September 2003||Domestic partnership (expansion)||23||14||41||33||Signed||Yes|
|New Jersey||January 2004||Domestic partnership||23||9||41||28||Signed||Yes|
|Maine||April 2004||Domestic partnership||18||14||84||58||Signed||Yes|
|California||September 2004||Domestic partnership (expansion)||23||12||46||29||Signed||Yes|
|Connecticut||April 2005||Civil union||27||9||85||63||Signed||Yes|
|Maryland||May 2005||Domestic partnership||31||16||83||50||Vetoed||No|
|California||September 2005||Domestic partnership (expansion)||23||15||47||28||Signed||Yes|
|California||September 2005||Domestic partnership (expansion)||21||14||47||32||Signed||Yes|
|California||September 2006||Domestic partnership (expansion)||24||15||46||29||Signed||Yes|
|California||September 2006||Domestic partnership (expansion)||23||15||47||31||Signed||Yes|
|New Jersey||December 2006||Civil union||23||12||56||19||Signed||Yes|
|New Hampshire||April 2007||Civil union||n/a||n/a||Failed||n/a||No|
|Washington||April 2007||Domestic partnership||28||19||63||35||Signed||Yes|
|Oregon||May 2007||Domestic partnership||21||9||34||26||Signed||Yes|
|New Hampshire||May 2007||Civil union||14||10||243||129||Signed||Yes|
|New York||June 2007||Marriage||n/a||n/a||85||61||n/a||No|
|California||October 2007||Domestic partnership (expansion)||Passed||Passed||Signed||Yes|
|New Hampshire||January 2008||Contractual cohabitation||Failed||n/a||n/a||n/a||No|
|New Mexico||February 2008||Domestic partnership||n/a||n/a||33||31||n/a||No|
|Washington||March 2008||Domestic partnership (expansion)||29||20||62||32||Signed||Yes|
|Maryland||May 2008||Domestic partnership||30||17||88||46||Signed||Yes|
|District of Columbia||May 2008||Domestic partnership (expansion)||Passed||Signed||Yes|
|New Mexico||February 2009||Domestic partnership||17||25||n/a||n/a||n/a||No|
|Colorado||April 2009||Designated beneficiary agreement||23||10||41||24||Signed||Yes|
|Connecticut||April 2009||Marriage (codification)||28||7||100||44||Signed||Yes|
|District of Columbia||May 2009||Marriage (recognition only)||Passed||Signed||Yes|
|Washington||May 2009||Domestic partnership (expansion)||30||18||62||35||Signed||Yes3|
|Nevada||May 2009||Domestic partnership||14||7||28||14||Vetoed1||Yes|
|New Hampshire||June 2009||Marriage||14||10||198||176||Signed||Yes|
|Oregon||June 2009||Domestic partnership (expansion)||27||0||41||8||Signed||Yes|
|Wisconsin||June 2009||Domestic partnership||17||16||50||48||Signed||Yes|
|California||October 2009||Out-of-state pre-proposition 8 marriage recognition||24||14||44||27||Signed||Yes|
|New York||December 2009||Marriage||24||38||89||52||n/a||No|
|District of Columbia||December 2009||Marriage||n/a||11||2||Signed||Yes|
|Rhode Island||January 2010||Domestic partnership (only 1 entitlement)||31||3||67||3||Vetoed1||Yes|
|New Jersey||January 2010||Marriage||14||20||n/a||n/a||n/a||No|
|Minnesota||May 2010||Domestic partnership (only 1 entitlement)||41||24||78||55||Vetoed||No|
|Hawaii||July 2010||Civil union||18||7||31||20||Vetoed||No|
|New York||July 2010||Domestic partnership (only 1 entitlement)||50||11||127||26||Signed||Yes|
|California||September 2010||Domestic partnership (expansion)||23||12||53||24||Signed||Yes|
|Illinois||January 2011||Civil union||32||24||61||52||Signed||Yes|
|Hawaii||February 2011||Civil union||18||5||31||19||Signed||Yes|
|New Hampshire||March 2011||Domestic union||n/a||n/a||Failed||n/a||No|
|Colorado||March 2011||Civil union||23||12||n/a||n/a||n/a||No|
|Washington||April 2011||Recognition of out-of-state union as domestic partnership||28||19||58||39||Signed||Yes|
|Delaware||May 2011||Civil union||13||6||26||15||Signed||Yes|
|New York||June 2011||Marriage||33||29||80||63||Signed||Yes|
|Rhode Island||July 2011||Civil union||21||16||62||11||Signed||Yes|
|California||September 2011||Domestic partnership (expansion)||22||13||52||25||Signed||Yes|
|California||October 2011||Domestic partnership (expansion)||25||15||Passed||Signed||Yes|
|California||October 2011||Domestic partnership (expansion)||24||13||Passed||Signed||Yes|
|New Jersey||February 2012||Marriage||24||16||42||33||Vetoed||Pending4|
|Colorado||May 2012||Civil union||23||12||n/a||n/a||n/a||No|
|Wyoming||January 2013||Domestic partnership||n/a||n/a||24||35||n/a||No|
|Colorado||March 2013||Civil union||21||14||39||26||Signed||Yes|
|Rhode Island||May 2013||Marriage||26||12||56||15||Signed||Yes|
- 1Veto overridden
- 2People's veto (Maine Question 1, 2009)
- 3People's veto failed (Washington Referendum 71, Washington Referendum 74, Maryland Question 6)
- 42013 proposal to override veto
Efforts to enable repeal amendment 
|State||Date||Type of same-sex union||Upper House||Lower house||Final
|Nevada||May 2013||Repeals Question 2 and legalizes marriage||12||9||Pending|
|Texas (Proposed)||2013||Repeals Proposition 2 and legalizes civil unions|
- 1Nevada Legislature would need to pass the measure by two separate sessions in order to amend their constitution.
Efforts to prohibit same-sex unions 
Votes by state legislatures to prohibit recognition of various types of same-sex unions, sorted by date:
|State||Date||Type of same-sex union||Upper House||Lower house||Governor||Final
|New Hampshire||March 1994||Recognition of out-of-state marriage||11||12||n/a||n/a||n/a||No|
|Idaho||March 1996||Recognition of out-of-state marriage||28||4||59||6||Signed||Yes|
|Alaska||May 1996||Marriage||Passed||Passed||Not Signed||Yes|
|South Carolina||May 1996||Marriage||Passed||82||0||Signed||Yes|
|Michigan||June 1996||Recognition of out-of-state marriage||Passed||74||28||Signed||Yes|
|North Carolina||June 1996||Recognition of out-of-state marriage||41||4||98||10||Signed||Yes|
|Maine||March 1997||Marriage||24||10||106||39||Not Signed||Yes|
|Florida||May 1997||Recognition of out-of-state marriage||33||5||97||19||Not Signed||Yes|
|Washington||February 1998||Marriage||34||11||65||28||Vetoed 1||Yes|
|Puerto Rico||March 1999||Marriage||Passed||Passed||Signed||Yes|
|West Virginia||March 2000||Marriage||Passed||96||3||Signed||Yes|
|New Hampshire||March 2000||Recognition of out-of-state marriage||n/a||n/a||128||232||n/a||No|
|New Hampshire||March 2001||Recognition of out-of-state civil union||n/a||n/a||88||276||n/a||No|
|Texas||May 2003||Recognition of out-of-state same-sex marriage and civil union||Passed||Passed||Signed||Yes|
|American Samoa||March 2003||Marriage||Failed||n/a||n/a||n/a||No|
|New Hampshire||March 2003||Recognition of out-of-state civil union||n/a||n/a||Failed||n/a||No|
|Ohio||February 2004||Recognition of out-of-state marriage||72||22||18||15||Signed||Yes|
|New Hampshire||May 2004||Recognition of out-of-state marriage||16||7||215||137||Signed||Yes|
|Wyoming||February 2007||Recognition of out-of-state marriage||21||8||n/a||n/a||n/a||No|
|New Hampshire||March 2008||Recognition of out-of-state union||n/a||n/a||Failed||n/a||No|
|New Hampshire||March 2009||Civil union||n/a||n/a||136||205||n/a||No|
|New Hampshire||February 2010||Marriage||n/a||n/a||109||210||n/a||No|
|Wyoming||March 2011||Recognition of out-of-state marriage||14||16||31||28||n/a||No|
|New Hampshire||March 2012||Marriage||n/a||n/a||116||211||n/a||No|
- 1Veto overridden.
Attempts to establish same-sex unions via initiative or statewide referendum 
|State||Intended date||Same-sex union||Description||Outcome|
|Maine||November 2012||Marriage||Initiative to establish same-sex marriage.||Yes|
|Ohio||November 2013||Marriage||Proposed constitutional amendment by initiative to remove ban and define marriage as "a union of two consenting adults, regardless of gender".||Collecting|
|Oregon||November 2014||Marriage||Proposed constitutional amendment by initiative to remove ban and establish same-sex marriage.||Collecting|
Efforts to ban same-sex unions by constitutional amendment 
|This section does not cite any references or sources. (January 2013)|
The following table shows all popular vote results regarding state constitutional amendments concerning same-sex marriage, and in some cases civil unions and domestic partnerships. The Hawaii amendment is different in that it granted the legislature authority to "reserve marriage to opposite-sex couples" (which the legislature had already done).
|State||Initiative||Ban on||Date||Yes vote||No vote||Final
|Alaska||Ballot Measure 2||Marriage||November 1998||68% (152,965)||32% (71,631)||Yes|
|Hawaii||Constitutional Amendment 2||Marriage ban
|November 1998||69% (285,384)||31% (117,827)||Yes 1|
|Nebraska||Initiative Measure 416||Marriage,
civil union and
|November 2000||70% (450,073)||30% (189,555)||Yes 2|
|Nevada||Question 2||Marriage||November 2002||67% (337,183)||33% (164,555)||Yes|
|Arkansas||Constitutional Amendment 3||Marriage and
|November 2004||75% (753,770)||25% (251,914)||Yes|
|Georgia||Constitutional Amendment 1||Marriage and
|November 2004||76% (2,454,912)||24% (768,703)||Yes 3|
|Kentucky||Constitutional Amendment 1||Marriage and
|November 2004||75% (1,222,125)||25% (417,097)||Yes|
|Louisiana||Constitutional Amendment 1||Marriage and
|September 2004||78% (618,928)||22% (177,103)||Yes 4|
|Michigan||State Proposal - 04-2||Marriage,
civil union and
|November 2004||59% (2,698,077)||41% (1,904,319)||Yes|
|Mississippi||Amendment 1||Marriage||November 2004||86% (957,104)||14% (155,648)||Yes|
|Missouri||Constitutional Amendment 2||Marriage||August 2004||71% (1,055,771)||29% (439,529)||Yes|
|Montana||Initiative 96||Marriage||November 2004||67% (295,070)||33% (148,263)||Yes|
|North Dakota||Constitutional Measure 1||Marriage and
|November 2004||73% (223,572)||27% (81,716)||Yes|
|Ohio||State Issue 1||Marriage and
|November 2004||62% (3,329,335)||38% (2,065,462)||Yes|
|Oklahoma||State Question 711||Marriage and
|November 2004||76% (1,075,216)||24% (347,303)||Yes|
|Oregon||Measure 36||Marriage||November 2004||57% (1,028,546)||43% (787,556)||Yes|
|Utah||Constitutional Amendment 3||Marriage and
|November 2004||66% (593,297)||34% (307,488)||Yes|
|Kansas||Proposed amendment 1||Marriage and
|April 2005||70% (414,106)||30% (178,018)||Yes|
|Texas||Proposition 2||Marriage and
|November 2005||76% (1,718,513)||24% (536,052)||Yes|
|Alabama||Amendment 774||Marriage and
|June 2006||81% (734,746)||19% (170,399)||Yes|
|Arizona||Proposition 107||Marriage and
|November 2006||48% (721,489)||52% (775,498)||No|
|Colorado||Amendment 43||Marriage||November 2006||56% (768,700)||44% (612,155)||Yes|
|Idaho||Amendment 2||Marriage and
|November 2006||63% (281,823)||37% (163,191)||Yes|
|South Carolina||Amendment 1||Marriage and
|November 2006||78% (818,894)||22% (230,674)||Yes|
|South Dakota||Amendment C||Marriage,
civil union and
|November 2006||52% (172,237)||48% (160,756)||Yes|
|Tennessee||Amendment 1||Marriage||November 2006||81% (1,417,315)||19% (326,335)||Yes|
civil union and
|November 2006||57% (1,325,668)||43% (1,003,967)||Yes|
|Wisconsin||Referendum 1||Marriage and
|November 2006||59% (1,260,554)||41% (861,554)||Yes|
|Arizona||Proposition 102||Marriage||November 2008||56% (1,258,355)||44% (980,753)||Yes|
|California||Proposition 8||Marriage||November 2008||52% (7,001,084)||48% (6,401,482)||Yes5|
|Florida||Amendment 2||Marriage and
|November 2008||62% (4,890,883)||38% (3,008,026)||Yes|
|North Carolina||Amendment 1||Marriage,
civil union and
|May 2012||61% (1,317,976)||39% (829,823)||Yes|
|Minnesota||Amendment 1||Marriage||November 2012||47% (1,399,676)||53% (1,549,676)||No|
- 1 Does not explicitly define marriage, but allows the legislature to define marriage.
- 2 Ban declared unconstitutional by Judge Joseph Bataillon, Chief Judge of the U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska. The ruling was appealed to the Eighth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals based in St. Louis. That Court issued a ruling that re-instated the ban, declaring in part that it was a legitimate state interest.[dead link]
- 3 Ban declared unconstitutional on May 16, 2006, by Fulton County Superior Court Judge Constance C. Russell, who said it violated the single-subject rule in Georgia's constitution. Governor Sonny Perdue said he was disappointed by the decision, which he said ran contrary to the voice of Georgia voters. The following day, the ruling was appealed to the Supreme Court of Georgia. On July 6, 2006 the Georgia Supreme Court ruled that the ban did not violate the single-subject rule.
- 4 On October 6, 2004, a Louisiana district judge tossed out the approved amendment saying it addressed two subjects: marriage and civil unions. Shortly after, the Louisiana Supreme Court unanimously overturned that ruling and found the amendment valid.
- 5 Ban declared unconstitutional pending appeal on August 4, 2010, by Judge Vaughn R. Walker, former Chief Justice of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California.
Recent, pending, or proposed attempts to constitutionally block same-sex unions 
|Delaware||2009||The proposed constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage failed. It was known as Senate Bill 27.||Failed|
|The Indiana senate voted 38-10 by Republican party lines for Senate Joint Resolution 13 to approve a constitutional amendment on the ballot in 2010 that defines marriage as "1 man and 1 woman". The amendment died in the house of representatives. Since 2004, amendements have been proposed or voted on. The amendment died in the house. On February 15, 2011, the house approved a ban on civil unions and marriage (70-26). The bill passed the senate by a 40-10 vote. According to state law, the bill must be approved by the next, separately elected legislatures before voters are allowed to decide its fate. If approved by the next legislature, voters will see the measure on the 2014 ballot.|
|After the Iowa Supreme Court made same-sex marriage legal in 2009, a backlash quickly developed that resulted in three of the justices losing their seats in the 2010 election. Additionally, Republicans took control of the state house and fell one seat short of taking over the state senate. For a proposed constitutional amendment to come before Iowa voters, it has to be approved in exactly the same form by two consecutive general assemblies.||Failed|
|2011||A bill was sponsored in 2009 but failed to be brought up for a vote. An amendment was introduced again in 2011. The house and senate bills passed. Both are referred to other area.[clarification needed] The bill would have been approved by majority by both the senate and house by May 23, 2011.[clarification needed] On May 11, 2011, the senate passed the bill 38-27. On May 22, 2011, an amendment was passed by the house by a vote of 70-62 and will be on the ballot in November 2012.[clarification needed]||Rejected in referendum|
|2010||On February 17, 2010, a proposed constitutional amendment failed in the house by a 201-135 margin. Constitutional amendments in New Hampshire require two-thirds approval from voters.||Failed|
|2010||Bills to place an amendment on the ballot have all failed in the house or senate Judiciary Committee.||Failed|
|2013||The New Mexico legislature considered four bills to restrict in-state same-sex marriage in 2011 and all were killed by a house committee on February 18, 2011. A similar bill was killed on February 5, 2013.||Failed|
|2013||A joint resolution was introduced in the house of representatives with record low sponsorship on May 8, 2013. The bill would ban same-sex marriages and civil unions. Pennsylvania would become the first northeastern state with a marriage amendment. According to state law, the bill must be approved by the next, separately elected legislature before voters are allowed to decide its fate. If approved by the next legislature, voters will see the measure on the ballot in 2015.|
|West Virginia senate lawmakers proposed a constitutional amendment for the 2010 ballot that would have defined marriage as "a union between and man and a woman". The amendment was defeated. Another proposition was introduced in January 2011 but failed to advance.||Failed|
|Wyoming||2009||2011||In 2009, the house of representatives considered an amendment to the state constitution, House Joint Resolution 17 (also known as the "Defense of Marriage" resolution), defining marriage as a union between a man and a woman. The measure was defeated in the house on February 6, with 35 votes against and 25 in favor. On January 27, 2011, the senate approved an amendment, but it died in the house.||Failed|
Efforts to ban same-sex unions by statutory initiative 
The following consists of votes by statutory initiatives that ban same-sex marriage and/or civil unions and domestic partnerships:
|State||Date||Yes vote||No vote||Description||Final outcome|
|California||March 2000||61% (4,618,673)||39% (2,909,370)||Proposition 22. Amend the Family Code to say: Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.1||Yes but ruled unconstitutional.2|
- 1 There is a debate as to whether the adoption of Prop 22 only prohibited California from recognizing same-sex marriages performed in other states.
- 2 In March 2005, Judge Richard Kramer ruled there appeared to be no rational state compelling interest in limiting marriage to heterosexual couples. His ruling was appealed to the California Court of Appeal for the 1st District, which upheld Proposition 22 on October 5, 2006. The Supreme Court of California ruled on May 15, 2008, that Proposition 22 is unconstitutional and it was struck down by the state's highest court.
Lawsuits seeking to overturn statutory bans 
||This article may be confusing or unclear to readers. (October 2009)|
The following consists of votes by state Supreme Court initiatives that allowed same-sex marriages or partnerships or uphold bans on same-sex marriages:
|State||Case||Date||Vote for||Vote against||Description||Restrictions unconstitutional?||Final outcome|
|Minnesota||Richard John Baker v. Gerald R. Nelson||October 15, 1971||0||7||Minnesota Supreme Court ruled that Minnesota's marriage statute applied only to opposite-sex couples. The case was appealed to the United States Supreme Court, but dismissed on October 10, 1972.||No||No|
|Kentucky||Jones v. Callahan||November 9, 1973||0||7||Kentucky Court of Appeals ruled that Kentucky's marriage statute applied only to opposite-sex couples.||No||No|
|Washington||Singer v. Hara||October 1974||Failed||Washington Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal of same-sex couple who were denied a marriage license by their county clerk. Washington Court of Appeals's decision stating that state marriage statutes only applied to opposite-sex couples upheld.||No||No|
|District of Columbia||Dean v. District of Columbia'||January 1995||0||9||District of Columbia Court of Appeals ruled that District's marriage statute applied only to opposite-sex couples.||No||No|
|Hawaii||Baehr v. Miike||December 9, 1999||0||5||Hawaii Supreme Court ruled on May 5, 1993, in a 3 in favor to 1 against decision, that state must provide a compelling interest to restricting marriage to opposite-sex couples. Remanded case to lower courts for trial on the subject. On December 3, 1996, Judge Chang ruled that the state had not established any compelling interest in denying same-sex couples the ability to marry and that, even if it had, it failed to prove that the Hawaii statute was narrowly tailored to avoid unnecessary abridgement of constitutional rights. He enjoined the state from refusing to issue marriage licenses to otherwise-qualified same-sex couples. The following day Chang stayed his ruling, acknowledging the "legally untenable" position couples would be in should the Supreme Court reverse him on appeal. Hawaii Supreme Court ruled that plaintiffs' arguments were moot in light of 1998 state constitutional amendment.||No||No|
|Vermont||Baker v. Vermont||December 20, 1999||5||0||Vermont Supreme Court rules that same-sex marriage or something similar must be implemented in 100 days.||Yes||Legalized civil unions in Vermont by Vermont General Assembly|
|Alaska||Brause v. Alaska Dept of Health & Social Services||April 17, 2001||0||5||Alaska Supreme Court ruled that plaintiffs' arguments were moot in light of 1998 state constitutional amendment.||No||No|
|Massachusetts||Goodridge v. Department of Public Health||November 18, 2003||4||3||Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court rules that same-sex marriages must be legal in 180 days.||Yes||Legalized same-sex marriage in Massachusetts on May 17, 2004|
|Arizona||Harold Donald Standhardt and Tod Alan Keltner v. State of Arizon||May 2004||Failed||Arizona Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal of Arizona Appellate Court ruling upholding statutory marriage ban.||No||No|
|Louisiana||Forum for Equality v McKeithen||January 19, 2005||0||7||District Judge William Morvant of Baton Rouge struck down the constitutional amendment on the grounds that it violated a provision of the state constitution requiring that an amendment cover only one subject. The Louisiana Supreme Court however upheld the constitutional amendment.||No||No|
|Oregon||Mary Li and Rebecca Kennedy et al. v. State of Oregon et al.||April 2005||0||7||Oregon Supreme Court ruled that plaintiffs' arguments were moot in light of 2004 state constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.||No||No|
|New York||Hernandez v. Robles||July 6, 2006||2||4||New York Court of Appeals upheld New York's marriage statute did not allow same-sex marriage, and that there is no constitutional right to same-sex marriage.||No||No|
|Georgia||Perdue v. O'Kelley||July 7, 2006||0||7||On May 16, 2006, Constance C. Russell of Fulton County Superior Court struck down the constitutional amendment on the grounds that it violated a provision of the state constitution requiring that an amendment cover only one subject. The Georgia Supreme Court however upheld the constitutional amendment.||No||No|
|Washington||Andersen v. King County||July 26, 2006||4||5||Washington Supreme Court upholds Washington's statute banning same-sex marriage.||No||No|
|New Jersey||Lewis v. Harris||October 25, 2006||7||0||New Jersey Supreme Court rules that same-sex marriage or something similar must be implemented in 100 days.||Yes||Legalized civil unions in New Jersey by New Jersey General Assembly|
|Maryland||Conaway v. Deane & Polyak||September 2007||3||4||Maryland Court of Appeals upholds Maryland's statute banning same-sex marriage.||No||No|
|Michigan||Pride at Work v. Granholm||May 7, 2008||5||2||Michigan Supreme Court ruled that Michigan's constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage and civil unions also applies to domestic partner benefits.||No||Constitution of Michigan prohibits domestic partner benefits for same-sex couples|
|California||In re Marriage Cases||May 15, 2008||4||3||California Supreme Court overturns Proposition 22 and rules that in 30 days, same-sex marriages must be legal.||Yes|| Same-sex marriage licenses issued in California from June 17, 2008 to November 5, 2008
On November 5, 2008, Proposition 8 goes into effect banning same-sex marriage in the Constitution of California
|Connecticut||Kerrigan v. Commissioner of Public Health||October 10, 2008||4||3||Connecticut Supreme Court rules that same-sex marriages must be legal in 30 days.||Yes||Legalized same-sex marriage in Connecticut on November 12, 2008|
|Iowa||Varnum v. Brien||April 2009||7||0||Iowa Supreme Court rules that same-sex marriages must be legal in 27 days.||Yes||Legalized same-sex marriage in Iowa on April 27, 2009|
|California||Strauss v. Horton||May 26, 2009||1||6||California Supreme Court upholds Proposition 8, however same-sex marriages performed before November 5, 2008 are also upheld.||No||California Supreme Court upholds Proposition 8, however same-sex marriages performed before November 5, 2008 are also upheld.|
|New York||Lewis v. New York State Department of Civil Service||November 2009||3||2||The case challenging the recognition of same-sex marriages in the state of New York was heard by New York Court of Appeals and upheld the rights that came with the recognition of same-sex marriages.||Recognition upheld||Continuing the recognition of same-sex marriages abroad.|
|Wisconsin||McConkey v. Van Hollen||June 30, 2010||0||7||Wisconsin Supreme Court upholds constitutional amendment.||No||No|
|Wyoming||Christiansen v. Christiansen||June 2011||Allowed||Wyoming Supreme Court allows two Wyoming residents to dissolve a legal relationship created under the laws of Canada.||Yes||Couple can divorce in Wyoming|
|Maryland||McConkey v. Van Hollen||May 18, 2012||7||0||Maryland Court of Appeals upholds Maryland's recognize same-sex marriage.||Recognition upheld||Continuing the recognition of same-sex marriages abroad.|
|Wisconsin||Appling v. Doyle||December 20, 2012||Failed||On November 4, 2009, Wisconsin Supreme Court declined to hear the challenge to Wisconsin's domestic partnership. On June 20, 2011, the Circuit court Judge Dan Moeser ruled that the domestic partnership registry does not violate the state constitution, finding that the state "does not recognize domestic partnership in a way that even remotely resembles how the state recognizes marriage". On December 21, 2012, District 4 Court of Appeals affirms Judge Moeser's decision in a unanimous ruling.||Recognition upheld||Wisconsin's domestic partnership law is upheld.|
|Montana||Donaldson and Guggenheim v. State of Montana||December 2012||3||4||Montana Supreme Court has sided with a lower court judge who dismissed this case previously. The gay couples weren't asking for the same statutory scheme available to opposite-sex couples (inheritance rights, health care decisions and children’s custody). However the High Court also said the legal complaint can be changed and re-filed with the lower court if it specifically cites state laws that are unconstitutional.||No||Pending (Ongoing in the Lewis and Clark County District Court)|
|Hawaii||Jackson v. Abercrombie||Pending||One same sex couple from Honolulu are suing the state of Hawaii for the right to marry after being told they could not file for a marriage license by the state health department. On August 8, 2012, U.S. District Judge Alan C. Kay ruled against the two women, who said they will appeal.||Pending|
|Illinois||Darby v. Orr and Lazaro v. Orr||Pending||Sixteen same sex couples filed a lawsuit challenging the state law which prohibits same-sex couples from marriage.||Pending|
|Michigan||DeBoer v. Snyder||Pending||Two lesbians, both nurses, who are raising three children adopted by only one of them, filed a lawsuit in federal court in January 2012 seeking to have the state's ban on adoption by same-sex couples overturned. At an August hearing on the state's motion to dismiss the suit, U.S. District Court Judge Bernard A. Friedman called the state's ban on same-sex marriage "the underlying issue" and gave the plaintiffs ten days amend their suit to challenge that as well, which they did on September 7. On March 7, 2013, after hearing arguments in the case, DeBoer v. Snyder, Friedman announced that he would delay ruling pending the outcome of two same-sex marriage cases now before the U.S. Supreme Court.||Pending|
|New Mexico||Griego v. Oliver||Pending||On 21 March 2013 ACLU filed a lawsuit in the Albuquerque District court on behalf of two New Mexico couples who are seeking the right to marry.||Pending|
|Texas||In Re Marriage of J.B. and H.B.||Pending||County judge ruled statutory and constitutional ban on same-sex marriage in violation of the US constitution; appealed to 5th Texas Court of Appeals. The court says Texas's same-sex marriage ban is constitutional. The Fifth Circuit denied en banc review. J.B. sought review from the Texas Supreme Court in February 2011 and that court requested briefs in October. The appeal was still pending in December 2012.||Pending|
|Texas||State of Texas v. Angelique S. Naylor and Sabina Daly||Pending||On January 7, 2011, the Third Court of Appeals in Austin in the case of State of Texas v. Angelique S. Naylor and Sabina Daly rejected, on procedural grounds, the Texas attorney general's appeal of a divorce granted by a lower court to a same-sex couple married in Massachusetts. The appeal was still pending in December 2012.||Pending|
See also 
- Same-sex marriage in the United States
- Same-sex marriage status in the United States by state
- Same-sex marriage law in the United States by state
- Same-sex union legislation
- 1 U.S.C. § 7
- 28 U.S.C. § 1738C
- "Democrats Aim For DOMA Repeal". Huffington Post. March 16, 2011.
- Petition for Certiorari (No 12-307). Retrieved December 8, 2012
- "Order List". United States Supreme Court. December 7, 2012. Retrieved December 8, 2012.
- D.C. Dopmestic Partnership Program
- Ingram, Carl (August 24, 1994). "Senate OKs Bill on Rights for Unwed Couples". The Los Angeles Times. Retrieved September 9, 2009.
- "Wilson: no to domestic partnership bill". The Sacramento Bee. September 12, 1994. p. A1. Retrieved September 9, 2009.
- "Gay marriages get thumps up in state senate". The Deseret News. March 6, 1996. p. A2. Retrieved September 9, 2009.
- Civil Unions
- California Assembly Bill 1059, 1998
- California Senate Bill 75, 1999
- California Assembly Bill 26, 1999
- Vermont House Bill 847, 2000
- California Senate Bill 1049, 2001
- California Assembly Bill 25, 2001
- California Senate Bill 1575, 2002
- California Assembly Bill 2216, 2002
- California Assembly Bill 205, 2003
- New Jersey Domestic Partnership Act
- Summary of LD 1579
- California Assembly Bill 2208, 2004
- House passes bill; reactions; bill signed into law
- Ehrlich Vetoes Bill Extending Rights to Gay Couples
- California Assembly Bill 19, 2005
- California Assembly Bill 849, 2005
- California Senate Bill 565, 2005
- California Senate Bill 973, 2005
- California Senate Bill 1827, 2006
- California Assembly Bill 2051, 2006
- Cloyd, Wendy (December 15, 2006). "New Jersey Legislature Adopts Civil Unions". Citizen Link. Retrieved November 4, 2009.
- Bill status of HB905
- "Washington State Passes Domestic Partnership Bill". US Politics. April 12, 2007. Retrieved November 4, 2009.
- Sklar, Roberta (May 2, 2007). "Task Force hails Oregon Senate passage of domestic partnership legislation covering same-sex couples". The Task Force. Retrieved November 4, 2009.
- Bill status of HB437
- "New York governor to propose legalizing same-sex marriage". CNN. April 14, 2009. Retrieved November 4, 2009.
- California Assembly Bill 43, 2007
- California Assembly Bill 102, 2007
- Docket of SB240
- Sklar, Roberta (February 21, 2008). "Task Force Action Fund denounces New Mexico Senate’s rejection of comprehensive domestic partnership bill". The Task Force. Retrieved November 4, 2009.
- Luna, Brad (March 13, 2008). "WA domestic partnership expansion bill signed into law". Free Press. Retrieved November 4, 2009.
- "SENATE BILL 566".
- Jantzen, M. V. (May 16, 2008). "D.C. Council Passes Domestic Partner Law Expansion". DCist. Retrieved November 4, 2009.
- Terrell, Steven (February 26, 2009). "Domestic partnership bill fails in Senate". Santa Fe New Mexican. Retrieved November 4, 2009.
- Abel, David (April 8, 2009). "Vermont legalizes same-sex marriage". The Boston Globe. Retrieved November 4, 2009.
- Ritter signs bill that will help gay couples
- Matthews, Chase (April 23, 2009). "Connecticut Gov. signs gay marriage into law". Chicago Pride. Retrieved November 4, 2009.
- Goodnough, Abby (May 5, 2009). "Gay Marriage Advances in Maine". New York Times. Retrieved November 4, 2009.
- Craig, Tim (May 5, 2009). "Uproar in D.C. as Same-Sex Marriage Gains". Washington Post. Retrieved November 4, 2009.
- "Washington Expands Domestic Partnerships, Offers Almost-Marriage". Family Fairness. April 16, 2009. Retrieved November 4, 2009.
- "Nevada legalizing domestic partnerships". CNN. May 31, 2009. Retrieved November 4, 2009.
- Love, Norma (June 3, 2009). "Gay Marriage: New Hampshire Makes Same-Sex Marriage Legal". Huffington Post. Retrieved November 4, 2009.
- Bill status of HB 2839
- Burroway, Jim (June 17, 2009). "Wisconsin Senate Approves Domestic Partnerships". Box Turtle Bulletin. Retrieved November 4, 2009.
- Schwarzenegger signs Milk Day, marriage recognition into law
- Honan, Edith (December 2, 2009). "NY Senate votes down gay marriage bill 38-24". Reuters.
- "Washington, D.C. Mayor Signs Law Legalizing Same-Sex Marriage". RTTNews. December 18, 2009.
- RI Lawmakers Back Funeral Rights For Gays
- "Gay marriage bill up for vote in NJ next week". Google. Associated Press. December 3, 2009.
- Citing Marriage, Tim Pawlenty Rejects Gay Rights Bill
- Hawaii Senate passes civil-unions bill with veto-proof majority, 18-7
- New York Law Requires Employers to Grant Funeral Leave Benefits to Same-Sex Partners Similar to Those Accorded to Other Employees
- California Assembly Bill 2055, 2010
- Illinois House passes civil unions legislation in historic vote
- Illinois Senate OK's Civil Unions For Gay & Lesbian Couples
- Illinois Governor Signs Historic Law, Extends a Measure of Fairness to All Couples
- Hawaii State Legislature 2011 Regular Session SB232 SD1
- Bill status of HB569
- Senate approves gay marriage; House passage not assured
- Maryland gay marriage bill dies with no final vote
- Colorado Senate Passes Civil Unions Bill
- House panel kills Colorado civil unions bill on 6-5 party-line vote
- Concerning reciprocity and statutory construction with regard to domestic partnerships
- Status of Senate Bill 30
- New York Allows Same-Sex Marriage, Becoming Largest State to Pass Law
- Breaking News: House Passes Controversial Civil Unions Bill
- California Senate Bill 117, 2011
- California Senate Bill 651, 2011
- California Senate Bill 757, 2011
- Same-Sex Marriage On New Jersey Senate Agenda
- Gay-marriage battle heating up in several states, including Maine
- http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/colo-civil-union-backers-push-for-final-vote-as-session-nears-end-bill-has-support-to-pass/2012/05/08/gIQASy5ZBU_story.html?tid=pm_national_pop[dead link]
- Bill status of HB 168
- Votes for SB13-011
- "R.I. Senate committee to consider gay marriage, referendum bills next Thursday". Metro Weekly. March 15, 2013.
- House Bill 5015 and Senate Bill 38.
- Status of House Bill 75
- Bill Status for HF 1054.
- Bill Status of SB10
- Long, Ray; Rafael Guerrero (February 14, 2013). "Illinois Senate approves gay marriage - chicagotribune.com". Chicago Tribune. Retrieved 14 February 2013.
- Civil unions and gay marriages performed in other states would be legal under proposed legislation
- Bill Status of SB1369
- Bill Status of HB1109
- http://www.rgj.com/viewart/20130422/NEWS11/130422033/Gay-marriage-resolution-advances-Nevada Nevada passes SJR13 (12-9)
- Same-Sex Marriages Banned by Fla. House
- Bills OK'd Barring Homosexual marriage, adoption
- Askew signs bill to ban gay marriage
- Homosexual Marriage Ban Signed
- New Hampshire
- New Hampshire Senate Bill 557, 1994
- Hawaii bans same-sex marriages
- Utah may ignore gay unions
- Batt signs law banning recognition of same-sex marriage
- Mariage veto
- Lawmakers say no to same-sex marriages
- Alaska Bars Gay Marriage, Congress To Debate Issue
- Same-sex marriage ban OK'd
- Governor signs bill prohibiting same-sex marriage
- Senators support bill banning gay marriages
- Governor signs ban on same-sex unions
- House OK's ban on gay marriages
- State Senate OK's gay marriage, sends bill to Engler
- Governor signs bill against gay unions
- The Bill
- North Carolina SB1487
- Gay marriage ban becomes law State of Missouri will recognize only male-female unions
- Setback for same-sex marriage ban Lieutenant governor's tie-breaking vote dooms measure
- State Senate votes to ban homosexual marriages in PA
- Legislature passes same-sex marriage ban, Gov. Ridge says he will sign the measure
- Mississippi joins ban on same-sex unions
- Mississippi joins ban on same-sex unions
- Locke's veto of gay marriage ban stands
- "Gay-marriage ban called irrelevant". Boston Globe. April 1, 1997.
- Chiles lets gay mariage ban stand
- Gay marriage ban vetoed
- "Washington Bans Gay Marriage". Chicago Tribune. February 8, 1998.
- http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summary.aspx?year=1997&bill=1130 Veto Vote
- Puerto Rico House Bill 1013, 1999
- West Virginia Legislature passes same-sex marriage ban
- New Hampshire House Bill 1293, 2000
- Governor signs gay-marriage ban among flock of other bills
- New Hampshire House Bill 454, 2001
- Same-sex marriage ban
- Perry Signs 'Defense of Marriage
- American Samoa Seante rejects bill outlawing same sex marriages
- New Hampshire House Bill 553, 2003
- "Doyle's Veto of Marriage Bill Stands, Assembly Fails by One Vote to Override It". November 14, 2003.
-  Same-Sex Marriage Assembly/Senate Votes (WI)
- Bill status of HB172
- New Hampshire Senate Bill 427, 2004
- S.F. No. 0013 Same sex marriages
- New Hampshire House Bill 1415, 2008
- New Hampshire House Bill 453, 2009
- New Hampshire House Overwhelmingly Rejects Attempt to Repeal Marriage Rights
- Repealing New Hampshire’s Gay Marriage Law Is *Inexpedient To Legislate*
- Anti-gay marriage bill defeated in Senate
- New Hampshire House kills repeal of gay marriage law
- Maine Question 1, 2012
- "Same-Sex Marriage Amendment In Ohio Gets Green Light", Huffington Post, reported by Anna Staver, 3 April 2012
- "Senator Portman Sorts Ohio Fallout After Marriage Shift" The New York Times. April 4, 2013. Retrieved April 8, 2013.
- "Voters May Get Chance to Weigh in on Same Sex Marriage", KNAU Arizona Public Radio, reported by Howard Fischer, 20 November 2012
- "Grand Rapids group wants gay marriage proposal on Michigan's 2014 ballot", MLive, reported by Matt Vande Bunte, 31 January 2013
- "Group begins planning 2016 ballot initiative for marriage equality", Today's THV, 19 November 2012
- "Group begins work to legalize gay marriage in South Dakota", KSFY, reported by Brian Allen, 26 November 2012
- "Voters in MN defeat anti-marriage constitutional amendment", Freedom to Marry, reported by Angela Dallara, 7 November 2012
- Curry, Tom (May 12, 2005). "Judge strikes down Nebraska gay marriage ban". MSNBC. Retrieved October 4, 2009.
- Baur, Scott (June 10, 2005). "Appeal filed to restore Nebraska’s prohibition of same-sex marriage". Lawrence Journal-World. Retrieved October 4, 2009.
- Washington Post
- "Georgia governor vows special session if gay marriage appeal slows". WIS News 10. May 17, 2006. Retrieved October 4, 2009.
- http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/07/06/MF.gay.marriage.ap/[dead link]
- "Marriage unanimously affirmed in Louisiana". Alliance Defense Fund. January 19, 2005. Retrieved October 4, 2009.
- "Judge strikes down Prop. 8, allows gay marriage in California". L.A. Times. August 4, 2010. Retrieved August 4, 2010.
- Delaware Senate Defeats Gay Marriage Ban
- Amendment prohibiting gay marriage clears Senate
- Marriage Discrimination Amendment Dies in State Legislature
- Indiana House Passes Gay Marriage Ban
- Iowa's governor-elect wants vote to ban gay marriage, criticizes senate leader
- Minnesota Gay Marriage Ban Amendment Clears First Hurdle
- Minnesota Gay Marriage Ban Amendment Clears House Panel
- "Minn. Senate OKs Vote on Gay-Marriage Ban". The Wall Street Journal. May 11, 2011.[dead link]
- NH House rejects two anti-gay marriage measures
- N.H. House Rejects Gay Marriage Ban
- Legislation introduced to restrict gay marriage in New Mexico
- Marriage Definition Bill Tabled Thursday
- Terrell, Steve (February 5, 2013). "House panel kills bill on definition-of-marriage amendment". Retrieved February 6, 2013.
- Daryl Metcalfe introduces anti-gay bill
- Lawmakers Study Amendment Banning Gay Marriage
- W.Va. Gay Marriage Ban Fails in House
- West Virginia Senators David Nohe, Donna Boley Back Gay Marriage Ban
- (Wyo.)-House Now Gets Chance At Gay Marriage Bill
- Same-sex marriage constitutional amendment dies in Wyoming House after missing deadline
- Full Results
- 291 Minn. 310 (Minn. 1971), 409 U.S. 810 (1972).
- Baker v. Nelson, 409 810 (U.S. 1972) (“The appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.”).
- Cantor, et.al, Donald J. (2006). Same-Sex Marriage: The Legal and Psychological Evolution in America. Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press. pp. 117–8. Kentucky Court of Appeals: Jones v. Callahan, November 9, 1973
- "Gay Marriage’s Jewish Pioneer", Eli Sanders, The Tablet, June 6, 2012.
- Dean v. District of Columbia
- Dean v. District of Columbia
- Baehr v. Miike, Circuit Court for the First Circuit, Hawaii No. 91-1394
- Oshiro, Sandra (1996-12-06). "Hawaiian judge puts same-sex marriage ruling on hold". The Nation (Thailand: Reuter). p. A12. Retrieved 2010-08-18.
- Baehr v. Lewin, 74 Haw. 530, 852 P.2d 44 (1993), reconsideration and clarification granted in part, 74 Haw. 645, 852 P.2d 74 (1993).
- Baker v. Vermont, 744 A.2d 864
- Brause v Alaska Dept of Health & Social Services (04/17/2001) sp-5392
- Boston Globe: Decision: Hillary Goodridge & others vs. Department of Public Health & another, November 18, 2003, accessed March 19, 2011
- "Harold Donald Standhardt and Tod Alan Keltner v. State of Arizona". Legal Marriage Court Cases. Retrieved February 17, 2013.
- Same-Sex Marriage in Louisiana
- Mary Li and Rebecca Kennedy, et al. v. State of Oregon, et al.
- Perdue v. O'Kelley, 280 Ga. 732 (2006)
- Lewis v. Harris
- Rich, Eric, and Wagner, John (September 18, 2007). "Maryland High Court Upholds Same-Sex Marriage Ban". Washington Post. Retrieved March 3, 2013.
- Public Employers in Michigan May Not Offer Same-Sex Domestic Partner Benefits, Michigan Supreme Court Rules
- Michigan high court says gay partners can't get health benefits
- Text of the decision
- Majority opinion
- Iowa Supreme Court decision, page 15.
- The court's ruling in Strauss
- Grossman, Joanna L. (November 24, 2009). "New York's Highest Court Upholds Benefits for Same-Sex Spouses in Narrow Ruling".
- Supreme Court of Wisconsin
- Wyoming High Court Grants Divorce to Same-Sex Couple
- Miller Jr., Ronald V. (May 18, 2012). "Same Sex Marriage Recognized By Maryland High Court" (in English). Miller & Zois LLC. Archived from the original on May 18, 2012. Retrieved May 18, 2012.
- "Domestic partnership registry lawsuit rejected", Green Bay Press Gazette Accessed 8 November 2009.
- Judge rules Wisconsin same sex registry is constitutional
- Lesbian Couple Sues Hawaii for Right to Marry
- "Illinois Gay Marriage Battle Heading To Court". Huffington Post. May 30, 2012.
- "Michigan adoption ban for unmarried couples being challenged in court today". Detroit News. 29 August 2012. Retrieved 7 September 2012.
- Ferretti, Christine (29 August 2012). "Judge tells couple to consider challenging state's gay marriage ban". Detroit News. Retrieved 7 September 2012.
- Ferretti, Christine (7 September 2012). "Hazel Park women challenge Michigan's marriage amendment". Detroit News. Retrieved 7 September 2012.
- "No immediate ruling on Michigan's 2004 gay marriage ban". Lansing State Journal. March 7, 2013. Retrieved March 7, 2013.
- Dwyer Arce (September 1, 2010). "Texas appeals court upholds same-sex marriage ban". JURIST - Paper Chase.
- Wright, John (October 20, 2011). "Gay divorce cases before Texas Supreme Court". Dallas Voice. Retrieved January 18, 2013.
- Rozen, Miriam (December 17, 2012). "Lawyer in two same-sex divorce cases awaits Texas Supreme Court decision on petitions for review". Texas Lawyer. Retrieved January 18, 2013.
- Kreytak, Steven (January 7, 2011). "Same-sex divorce stands under appellate ruling: Attorney general did not have standing to intervene in case, court declares". Austin American-Statesman. Retrieved January 19, 2013.
- Rozen, Miriam (December 17, 2012). "Tex Parte Blog: Lawyer in two same-sex divorce cases awaits Texas Supreme Court decision on petitions for review". Texas Lawyer. Retrieved January 19, 2013.