Same-sex marriage legislation in the United States
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.
On June 26, 2015, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in the case of Obergefell v. Hodges that a fundamental right to marry is guaranteed to same-sex couples by the Fourteenth Amendment, and that states must allow same-sex marriage.
In 1996, the United States Congress passed and President Bill Clinton signed Public Law 104-199, the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). Section 3 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 of DOMA, which relieves jurisdictions within the United States of any obligation to recognize same-sex relationships legally established in any other jurisdiction, is less clear.
In United States v. Windsor, the Supreme Court was asked to determine the constitutionality of Section 3 of DOMA, which defines marriage for federal purposes as the union of a man and a woman. On June 26, 2013, the Supreme Court ruled by a 5-4 vote that the Section 3 of DOMA is unconstitutional.
The State Marriage Defense Act, introduced in the House of Representatives on January 9, 2014, would require the federal government to recognize the validity of a marriage based on a person's legal residence (place of domicile), rather than on the validity of the marriage when and where it was solemnized (place of celebration). The Obama administration has generally used the latter standard. Its sponsors described it as a way to clarify the federal government's response to Windsor and restore the ability of the a state to control the definition of marriage within its borders.
In Obergefell v. Hodges, the Supreme Court was asked to determine the constitutionality of state bans on same-sex marriage licenses as well as state bans on recognition of same-sex marriages from other states. On June 26, 2015, the court ruled by a 5-4 vote that the Fourteenth Amendment obliges states to license same-sex marriages and to recognize same-sex marriages from other states.
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||N/A||Passed||Signed||Yes|
|California||September 1994||Domestic partnership||21||17||41||26||Vetoed||No|
|Hawaii||March 1996||Domestic partnership||14||11||Failed||—||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|
|Rhode Island||July 2001||Domestic partnership||Passed||Passed||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|
|New York||August 2002||Domestic partnership||Passed||147||0||Signed||Yes|
|New York||August 2002||Domestic partnership (expansion)||Passed||147||0||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|
|District of Columbia||April 2003||Domestic partnership (expansion)||N/A||Passed||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|
|District of Columbia||May 2004||Domestic partnership (expansion)||N/A||Passed||Signed||Yes|
|California||September 2004||Domestic partnership (expansion)||23||12||46||29||Signed||Yes|
|New York||September 2004||Domestic partnership (expansion)||Passed||141||1||Signed||Yes|
|District of Columbia||December 2004||Domestic partnership (expansion)||N/A||Passed||Signed||Yes|
|District of Columbia||January 2005||Domestic partnership (expansion)||N/A||Passed||Signed||Yes|
|Connecticut||April 2005||Civil union||27||9||85||63||Signed||Yes|
|Maryland||May 2005||Domestic partnership||31||16||83||50||Vetoed||No|
|Rhode Island||June 2005||Domestic partnership (expansion)||Passed||—||—||—||No|
|Rhode Island||July 2005||Domestic partnership (expansion)||Passed||—||—||—||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|
|District of Columbia||December 2005||Domestic partnership (expansion)||N/A||Passed||Signed||Yes|
|New Jersey||January 2006||Domestic partnership (expansion)||39||0||67||8||Signed||Yes|
|District of Columbia||January 2006||Domestic partnership (expansion)||N/A||Passed||Signed||Yes|
|New York||March 2006||Domestic partnership (expansion)||Passed||96||25||Signed||Yes|
|Maine||April 2006||Domestic partnership (expansion)||Passed||Passed||Signed||Yes|
|New York||June 2006||Domestic partnership (expansion)||—||—||114||27||—||No|
|New York||June 2006||Domestic partnership (expansion)||—||—||116||27||—||No|
|Rhode Island||June 2006||Domestic partnership (expansion)||Passed||Passed||N/A4||Yes|
|Rhode Island||June 2006||Domestic partnership (expansion)||Passed||Passed||N/A4||Yes|
|Rhode Island||July 2006||Domestic partnership (expansion)||Passed||Passed||N/A4||Yes|
|Rhode Island||July 2006||Domestic partnership (expansion)||Passed||Passed||N/A4||Yes|
|Rhode Island||July 2006||Domestic partnership (expansion)||Passed||Passed||N/A4||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|
|District of Columbia||December 2006||Domestic partnership (expansion)||N/A||Passed||Signed||Yes|
|New Hampshire||April 2007||Civil union||—||—||Failed||—||No|
|Washington||April 2007||Registered domestic partnership||28||19||63||35||Signed||Yes|
|Oregon||May 2007||Domestic partnership||21||9||34||26||Signed||Yes|
|Maine||May 2007||Domestic partnership (expansion)||Passed||Passed||Signed||Yes|
|New Hampshire||May 2007||Civil union||14||10||243||129||Signed||Yes|
|Maine||June 2007||Domestic partnership (expansion)||Passed||Passed||Signed||Yes|
|Maine||June 2007||Domestic partnership (expansion)||Passed||Passed||Signed||Yes|
|New York||June 2007||Marriage||—||—||85||61||—||No|
|Rhode Island||July 2007||Domestic partnership (expansion)||Passed||Passed||N/A4||Yes|
|California||October 2007||Domestic partnership (expansion)||Passed||Passed||Signed||Yes|
|Rhode Island||October 2007||Domestic partnership (expansion)||Passed||Passed||Vetoed 1||Yes|
|New Hampshire||January 2008||Contractual cohabitation||Failed||—||—||—||No|
|New York||January 2008||Domestic partnership (expansion)||Passed||—||—||—||No|
|New Mexico||February 2008||Domestic partnership||—||—||33||31||—||No|
|Washington||March 2008||Registered domestic partnership (expansion)'||29||20||62||32||Signed||Yes|
|Maine||March 2008||Domestic partnership (expansion)||Passed||Passed||Signed||Yes|
|Maryland||April 2008||Domestic partnership||—||—||86||51||—||No|
|Maryland||May 2008||Domestic partnership||30||17||88||46||Signed||Yes|
|Maryland||May 2008||Domestic partnership||27||20||86||47||Signed||Yes|
|District of Columbia||May 2008||Domestic partnership (expansion)||N/A||Passed||Signed||Yes|
|New Mexico||February 2009||Domestic partnership||17||25||—||—||—||No|
|Vermont||April 2009||Marriage||23||5||100||49||Vetoed 1||Yes|
|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)||N/A||Passed||Signed||Yes|
|Washington||May 2009||Registered domestic partnership (expansion)||30||18||62||35||Signed||Yes3|
|District of Columbia||May 2009||Domestic partnership (expansion)||N/A||Passed||Signed||Yes|
|Maine||May 2009||Domestic partnership (expansion)||Passed||Passed||Signed||Yes|
|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|
|New York||August 2009||Domestic partnership (expansion)||Passed||142||0||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||—||No|
|District of Columbia||December 2009||Marriage||N/A||11||2||Signed||Yes|
|Rhode Island||January 2010||Domestic partnership (expansion)||Passed||Passed||Vetoed 1||Yes|
|Rhode Island||January 2010||Domestic partnership (expansion)||Passed||Passed||Vetoed 1||Yes|
|New York||January 2010||Domestic partnership (expansion)||61||0||142||0||Signed||Yes|
|New Jersey||January 2010||Marriage||14||20||—||—||—||No|
|New York||March 2010||Domestic partnership (expansion)||—||—||119||20||—||No|
|New York||March 2010||Domestic partnership (expansion)||Passed||137||5||Signed||Yes|
|New York||April 2010||Domestic partnership (expansion)||—||—||132||9||—||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||August 2010||Committed partnership||50||11||107||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||—||—||Failed||—||No|
|Colorado||March 2011||Civil union||23||12||—||—||—||No|
|Washington||April 2011||Recognition of out-of-state union as registered domestic partnership||28||19||58||39||Signed||Yes|
|Nevada||May 2011||Recognition of out-of-state union as domestic partnership||21||0||41||0||Signed||Yes|
|Washington||May 2011||Registered domestic partnership (expansion)||27||21||57||40||Signed||Yes|
|Delaware||May 2011||Civil union||13||6||26||15||Signed||Yes|
|Nevada||May 2011||Domestic partnership (expansion)||11||10||—||—||—||No|
|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||No|
|New York||April 2012||Domestic partnership (expansion)||—||—||129||10||—||No|
|Colorado||May 2012||Civil union||23||12||—||—||—||No|
|New Jersey||August 2012||Civil union and domestic partnership (expansion: surrogacy)||21||11||41||33||Vetoed||No|
|Wyoming||January 2013||Domestic partnership||—||—||24||35||—||No|
|Colorado||March 2013||Civil union||21||14||39||26||Signed||Yes|
|Rhode Island||May 2013||Marriage||26||12||56||15||Signed||Yes|
|Nevada||June 2013||Domestic partnership (expansion)||21||0||41||0||Signed||Yes|
|New York||February 2014||Marriage (codification)||—||—||125||10||—||No|
|New York||April 2014||Domestic partnership (expansion)||—||—||124||14||—||No|
|California||July 2014||Marriage (statutory codification)||25||10||51||11||Signed||Yes|
|Virginia||February 2015||Marriage (statutory codification)||20||18||—||—||—||No|
|Utah||March 2015||Marriage (partial statutory codification)||26||0||39||30||Signed||Yes|
|New Mexico||April 2015||Marriage (partial codification)||35||5||37||10||Signed||Yes|
|Nevada||June 2015||Domestic partnership (expansion)||21||0||42||0||Signed||Yes|
|Nevada||June 2015||Domestic partnership (expansion)||19||0||41||1||Signed||Yes|
|New Jersey||June 2015||Marriage, civil union and domestic partnership (expansion: surrogacy)||21||13||43||25||Vetoed||No|
|Maine||June 2015||Marriage (expansion)||35||0||141||0||Vetoed1||Yes|
|Oregon||July 2015||Marriage (statutory codification)||18||11||40||18||Signed||Yes|
|Guam||August 2015||Marriage (codification)||N/A||13||2||N/A4||Yes|
|New York||September 2015||Marriage (codification)||60||0||146||1||Signed||Yes|
|District of Columbia||December 2015||Domestic partnership (expansion)||N/A||Passed||Signed||Yes|
|Oregon||March 2016||Marriage (statutory codification)||18||11||43||13||Signed||Yes|
|New York||March 2016||Marriage (codification)||—||—||129||12||—||No|
|New York||April 2016||Domestic partnership (expansion)||—||—||120||15||—||No|
|Colorado||June 2016||Conversion of civil union into marriage||34||0||52||13||Signed||Yes|
|North Carolina||June 2016||Marriage (partial statutory codification)||—||—||Passed||—||No|
|California||July 2016||Marriage and domestic partnership (statutory codification)||34||0||63||1||Signed||Yes|
|North Dakota||January 2017||Marriage (statutory codification)||15||31||—||—||—||No|
|New Mexico||February 2017||Marriage (partial codification)||—||—||63||0||—||No|
|Utah||March 2017||Marriage (partial statutory codification)||26||0||74||0||Signed||Yes|
|Utah||March 2017||Marriage (partial statutory codification)||29||0||69||3||Signed||Yes|
|Utah||March 2017||Marriage (partial statutory codification)||27||0||68||0||Signed||Yes|
|Maryland||May 2017||Domestic partnership (expansion)||138||2||45||0||Signed||Yes|
|Nevada||May 2017||Marriage (statutory codification)||20||1||28||10||Signed||Yes|
|Nevada||June 2017||Domestic partnership (expansion)||21||0||41||0||Signed||Yes|
|New York||June 2017||Marriage (codification)||62||0||139||0||Signed||Yes|
|New Jersey||June 2017||Marriage, civil union and domestic partnership (expansion: surrogacy)||22||15||—||—||—||No|
|North Carolina||July 2017||Marriage (partial statutory codification)||Passed||Passed||Signed||Yes|
|Maine||July 2017||Marriage (codification)||Passed||Passed||N/A4||Yes|
|Maryland||January 2018||Domestic partnership (expansion)||135||2||45||1||Vetoed||No|
|New Mexico||February 2018||Marriage (partial codification)||—||—||60||2||—||No|
|New York||March 2018||Marriage (codification)||—||—||129||6||—||No|
|Utah||March 2018||Marriage (partial statutory codification)||27||0||70||0||Signed||Yes|
|Utah||March 2018||Marriage (partial statutory codification)||23||0||73||0||Signed||Yes|
|Utah||March 2018||Marriage (partial statutory codification)||23||4||44||24||Signed||Yes|
|Utah||March 2018||Marriage (partial statutory codification)||25||3||45||26||Signed||Yes|
|New York||April 2018||Domestic partnership (expansion)||—||—||114||17||—||No|
|Minnesota||May 2018||Marriage (codification)||34||33||78||50||Vetoed||No|
|New Jersey||May 2018||Marriage, civil union and domestic partnership (expansion: surrogacy)||Passed||Passed||Signed||Yes|
|New York||June 2018||Marriage (codification)||57||4||—||—||—||No|
|New Hampshire||June 2018||Marriage (equalization of marriageable age)||Passed||Passed||Signed||Yes|
|Arkansas||March 2019||Marriage (partial statutory codification)||35||0||96||0||Signed||Yes|
|Nebraska||March 2019||Marriage (partial statutory codification)||N/A||38||6||Signed||Yes|
|New Mexico||March 2019||Marriage (partial codification)||—||—||53||2||—||No|
|Virginia||March 2019||Marriage (expansion: surrogacy)||28||12||63||36||Signed||Yes|
|New Mexico||March 2019||Marriage (partial codification)||32||8||40||25||Signed||Yes|
|Nebraska||March 2019||Marriage (partial statutory codification)||N/A||45||0||Signed||Yes|
|Utah||March 2019||Marriage (partial statutory codification)||22||2||55||6||Signed||Yes|
|Utah||March 2019||Marriage (partial statutory codification)||29||0||69||4||Signed||Yes|
|New Mexico||April 2019||Marriage (partial codification)||39||0||62||0||Signed||Yes|
|Maryland||May 2019||Marriage (expansion)||34||10||121||15||Signed||Yes|
|Maryland||May 2019||Marriage (expansion)||31||14||133||6||Signed||Yes|
|Oklahoma||May 2019||Marriage (expansion: surrogacy)||33||10||84||6||Signed||Yes|
|Nebraska||May 2019||Marriage (partial statutory codification)||N/A||40||3||Signed||Yes|
|Nebraska||May 2019||Marriage (partial statutory codification)||N/A||33||8||Vetoed||No|
|Minnesota||May 2019||Marriage (codification)||52||15||74||50||Signed||Yes|
|Rhode Island||June 2019||Marriage (expansion)||35||0||—||—||—||No|
|Maine||June 2019||Marriage (codification)||Passed||Passed||Signed||Yes|
|Delaware||July 2019||Marriage (codification)||20||1||37||4||Signed||Yes|
|New York||October 2019||Marriage (codification)||61||0||121||23||Signed||Yes|
|Hawaii||December 2019||Marriage and civil union (codification)||—||—||Passed||—||No|
|New York||December 2019||Domestic partnership (expansion)||59||0||122||24||Signed||Yes|
|New Hampshire||January 2020||Marriage (codification)||—||—||Failed||—||No|
|New Mexico||February 2020||Marriage (partial codification)||42||0||64||0||Signed||Yes|
|Nebraska||February 2020||Marriage (partial statutory codification)||N/A||47||0||Signed||Yes|
|New Mexico||February 2020||Marriage (partial codification)||40||0||67||0||Signed||Yes|
|Virginia||March 2020||Marriage (partial statutory codification)||28||12||63||34||Signed||Yes|
|Virginia||March 2020||Marriage (partial statutory codification)||25||13||62||38||Signed||Yes|
|Virginia||March 2020||Marriage (partial statutory codification)||33||6||58||42||Signed||Yes|
|Utah||March 2020||Marriage (partial statutory codification)||24||1||70||0||Signed||Yes|
|Utah||March 2020||Marriage (partial statutory codification)||27||0||71||0||Signed||Yes|
|Virginia||April 2020||Marriage (partial statutory codification)||39||1||91||6||Signed||Yes|
|New York||April 2020||Marriage (expansion)||Passed||Passed||Signed||Yes|
|Virginia||April 2020||Marriage (statutory codification)||24||16||53||43||Signed||Yes|
|New York||April 2020||Domestic partnership (expansion)||62||0||131||11||Signed||Yes|
|Puerto Rico||June 2020||Marriage (codification)||Passed||Passed||Signed||Yes|
|North Carolina||June 2020||Marriage (partial statutory codification)||47||0||Passed||Signed||Yes|
|New Hampshire||July 2020||Marriage (codification)||Passed||209||119||Signed||Yes|
|Rhode Island||July 2020||Marriage (expansion)||34||1||64||1||Signed||Yes|
|Rhode Island||July 2020||Marriage (expansion)||36||1||67||1||Signed||Yes|
|Nevada||May 2017||Marriage (constitutional codification)||19||2||27||14||N/A|
|New Jersey||2020||Marriage and civil union (partial codification)||Pending|
- 1Veto overridden
- 2People's veto (Maine Question 1, 2009)
- 3People's veto failed (Washington Referendum 71, Washington Referendum 74, Maryland Question 6)
- 4The bill was allowed to lapse into law.
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||July 1987||Marriage||Passed||Passed||Signed||Yes2|
|New Hampshire||March 1994||Recognition of out-of-state marriage||11||12||—||—||—||No|
|South Dakota||January 1996||Marriage||26||8||49||18||Signed||Yes|
|Idaho||March 1996||Recognition of out-of-state marriage||28||4||59||6||Signed||Yes|
|Alaska||May 1996||Marriage and civil union||16||3||31||9||N/A3||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||Marriage and recognition of out-of-state marriage||41||4||98||10||Signed||Yes|
|North Dakota||February 1997||Marriage||43||6||73||18||Signed||Yes|
|Virginia||March 1997||Recognition of out-of-state marriage||40||0||87||9||Signed||Yes|
|Montana||April 1997||Marriage and civil union||45||5||73||23||Signed||Yes|
|Florida||May 1997||Recognition of out-of-state marriage and civil union||33||5||97||19||N/A3||Yes|
|Washington||February 1998||Marriage||34||11||65||28||Vetoed 4||Yes2|
|Kentucky||April 1998||Marriage and recognition out-of-state marriage||32||2||84||9||Signed||Yes|
|Puerto Rico||March 1999||Marriage||Passed||Passed||Signed||Yes|
|Louisiana||July 1999||Marriage and recognition of out-of-state marriage||32||0||95||0||Signed||Yes|
|West Virginia||March 2000||Marriage||Passed||96||3||Signed||Yes|
|New Hampshire||March 2000||Recognition of out-of-state marriage||—||—||128||232||—||No|
|New Hampshire||March 2001||Recognition of out-of-state civil union||—||—||88||276||—||No|
|American Samoa||March 2003||Marriage||Failed||—||—||—||No|
|New Hampshire||March 2003||Recognition of out-of-state civil union||—||—||Failed||—||No|
|Texas||May 2003||Recognition of out-of-state same-sex marriage and civil union||Passed||Passed||Signed||Yes|
|Ohio||February 2004||Marriage, recognition of out-of-state marriage, and civil union||72||22||18||15||Signed||Yes|
|Utah||March 2004||Civil union||Passed||Passed||Signed||Yes|
|Virginia||April 2004||Civil union||27||12||69||30||N/A3||Yes|
|New Hampshire||May 2004||Recognition of out-of-state marriage||16||7||215||137||Signed||Yes2|
|Wyoming||February 2007||Recognition of out-of-state marriage||21||8||—||—||—||No|
|New Hampshire||March 2008||Recognition of out-of-state union||—||—||Failed||—||No|
|New Hampshire||March 2009||Civil union||—||—||136||205||—||No|
|New Hampshire||February 2010||Marriage||—||—||109||210||—||No|
|Wyoming||March 2011||Recognition of out-of-state marriage||14||16||31||28||—||No|
|New Hampshire||March 2012||Marriage||—||—||116||211||—||No|
|Wyoming||February 2014||Recognition of out-of-state marriage||—||—||29||31||—||No|
- 1 On June 26, 2015, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in the case of Obergefell v. Hodges that a fundamental right to marry is guaranteed to same-sex couples by the Fourteenth Amendment, and that states must allow same-sex marriage.
- 2 Subsequently repealed.
- 3 The bill was allowed to lapse into law.
- 4 Veto 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|
Efforts to enable ban amendment
|State||Date||Type of same-sex union||Upper House||Lower house||Final|
|Hawaii||1998||Marriage ban permitted||Passed||Passed||Placed on Ballot|
|November 1998||Referendum (69.18%)||Yes|
|Alaska||1998||Same-sex marriage||14||6||28||12||Placed on Ballot|
|November 1998||Referendum (68.1%)||Yes|
|Indiana||February 2004||Same-sex marriage||42||7||—||—||No|
|Missouri||2004||Same-sex marriage||Passed||Passed||Placed on Ballot|
|August 2004||Referendum (70.6%)||Yes|
|Louisiana||May/June 2004||Same-sex marriage and civil unions||31||6||64||29||No|
|87||11||Placed on Ballot|
|September 2004||Referendum (77.79%)||Yes|
|Mississippi||2004||Same-sex marriage||Passed||Passed||Placed on Ballot|
|November 2004||Referendum (86.01%)||Yes|
|Georgia||February/March 2004||Same-sex marriage and civil unions||40||14||117||50||No|
|122||52||Placed on Ballot|
|November 2004||Referendum (76.2%)||Yes|
|Utah||March 2004||Same-sex marriage and civil unions||20||7||58||14||Placed on Ballot|
|November 2004||Referendum (65.86%)||Yes|
|Kentucky||April 2004||Same-sex marriage and civil unions||33||5||85||11||Placed on Ballot|
|November 2004||Referendum (74.55%)||Yes|
|Oklahoma||April 2004||Same-sex marriage and civil unions||26||19||92||4||Placed on Ballot|
|November 2004||Referendum (75.58%)||Yes|
|Kansas||January/February 2005||Same-sex marriage and civil unions||28||11||86||37||Placed on Ballot|
|April 2005||Referendum (69.94%)||Yes|
|Texas||May 2005||Same-sex marriage and civil unions||21||8||101||29||Placed on Ballot|
|November 2005||Referendum (76.25%)||Yes|
|Alabama||March 2005||Same-sex marriage and civil unions||30||0||85||7||Placed on Ballot|
|June 2006||Referendum (81.2%)||Yes|
|South Carolina||2005||Same-sex marriage and civil unions||Passed||Passed||Placed on Ballot|
|November 2006||Referendum (77.97%)||Yes|
|South Dakota||February 2005||Same-sex marriage and civil unions||20||14||55||14||Placed on Ballot|
|November 2006||Referendum (51.83%)||Yes|
|Wisconsin||March 2004||Same-sex marriage and civil unions||20||13||68||27||Advanced|
|February 2006||19||14||62||31||Placed on Ballot|
|November 2006||Referendum (59.4%)||Yes|
|Tennessee||May 2004||Same-sex marriage||28||1||85||5||Advanced|
|March 2005||29||3||88||7||Placed on Ballot|
|November 2006||Referendum (81.25%)||Yes|
|Idaho||February 2006||Same-sex marriage and civil unions||26||9||53||17||Placed on Ballot|
|November 2006||Referendum (63.4%)||Yes|
|Virginia||March 2006||All types of same-sex unions||28||11||85||12||Placed on Ballot|
|November 2006||Referendum (57.06%)||Yes|
|Pennsylvania||June 2006||Same-sex marriage||38||12||136||61||Advanced|
|Arizona||May/June 2008||Same-sex marriage||14||11||35||25||No|
|16||4||Placed on Ballot|
|November 2008||Referendum (56.2%)||Yes|
|Wyoming||February 2009||Same-sex marriage||—||—||25||35||No|
|West Virginia||March 2009||Same-sex marriage||—||—||30||67||No|
|Indiana||January 2010||Same-sex marriage and civil unions||38||10||—||—||No|
|New Hampshire||February 2010||Same-sex marriage||—||—||135||201||No|
|Wyoming||January 2011||Same-sex marriage||20||10||—||—||No|
|Iowa||February 2011||Same-sex marriage||—||—||62||37||No|
|North Carolina||September 2011||Same-sex marriage and civil unions||30||16||75||42||Placed on Ballot|
|May 2012||Referendum (61.04%)||Yes|
|Minnesota||May 2011||Same-sex marriage||37||27||70||62||Placed on Ballot|
|November 2012||Referendum (47.44%)||No|
|Indiana||March 2011||Same-sex marriage and civil unions||40||10||70||26||No, Bill was amended|
|Indiana||February 2014||Same-sex marriage||32||17||57||40||Advanced|
Efforts to ban same-sex unions by constitutional amendment
This section does not cite any sources. (January 2013) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)
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||Total votes||Voter turnout||Electorate||Final |
|Alabama||Amendment 774||Marriage and
|June 6, 2006||697,591||81.2%||161,694||18.8%||859,285||25.73%||3,338,467||Yes|
|Alaska||Ballot Measure 2||Marriage||November 3, 1998||152,965||68.1%||71,631||31.9%||224,596||50.11%||453,332||Yes|
|Arizona||Proposition 107||Marriage and
|November 7, 2006||721,789||48.2%||775,498||51.8%||1,496,987||38.15%||3,923,786||No|
|Arizona||Proposition 102||Marriage||November 4, 2008||1,258,355||56.2%||980,753||43.8%||2,239,078||55.33%||2,987,451||Yes|
|Arkansas||Constitutional Amendment 3||Marriage and
|November 2, 2004||753,770||74.95%||251,914||25.04%||1,005,684||51.07%||1,969,208||Yes|
|California||Proposition 8||Marriage||November 4, 2008||7,001,084||52.24%||6,401,482||47.76%||13,743,177||61.73%||22,261,504||Yes2|
|Colorado||Amendment 43||Marriage||November 7, 2006||855,126||55.02%||699,030||44.98%||1,554,156||47.13%||3,297,308||Yes|
|Florida||Amendment 2||Marriage and
|November 4, 2008||4,890,883||61.92%||3,008,026||38.08%||8,456,329||66.65%||12,687,407||Yes|
|Georgia||Constitutional Amendment 1||Marriage and
|November 2, 2004||2,454,930||76.2%||768,716||23.8%||3,223,646||54.84%||5,878,186||Yes|
|Hawaii||Constitutional Amendment 2||Marriage ban
|November 3, 1998||285,384||69.18%||117,827||28.56%||403,211||Yes3|
|Idaho||Amendment 2||Marriage and
|November 7, 2006||282,386||63.4%||163,384||36.6%||445,770||49.04%||908,925||Yes|
|Kansas||Proposed amendment 1||Marriage and
|April 5, 2005||417,675||69.94%||179,432||30.06%||597,107||Yes|
|Kentucky||Constitutional Amendment 1||Marriage and
|November 2, 2004||1,222,125||74.55%||417,097||25.45%||1,639,222||53.6%||3,057,741||Yes|
|Louisiana||Constitutional Amendment 1||Marriage and
|September 18, 2004||619,908||77.79%||177,067||22.21%||796,975||25.04%||3,182,762||Yes|
|Michigan||State Proposal - 04-2||All types of same-sex unions4||November 2, 2004||2,698,077||58.63%||1,904,319||41.37%||4,602,396||63.36%||7,263,024||Yes|
|Minnesota||Amendment 1||Marriage||November 6, 2012||1,399,916||47.44%||1,550,864||52.56%||2,950,780||76.11%||3,876,752||No|
|Mississippi||Amendment 1||Marriage||November 2, 2004||957,104||86.01%||155,648||13.99%||1,112,752||53.78%||2,068,766||Yes|
|Missouri||Constitutional Amendment 2||Marriage||August 3, 2004||1,055,771||70.6%||439,529||29.4%||1,495,300||35.76%||4,180,960||Yes|
|Montana||Initiative 96||Marriage||November 2, 2004||295,070||66.55%||148,263||33.45%||443,333||63.41%||699,114||Yes|
|Nebraska||Initiative Measure 416||All types of same-sex unions||November 7, 2000||450,07||70.36%||189,555||29.64%||639,628||52.24%||1,224,178||Yes|
|Nevada||Question 2||Marriage||November 7, 2000||412,688||69.62%||180,077||30.38%||592,765||44.03%||1,346,116||Yes|
|Nevada||Question 2||Marriage||November 7, 2002||337,197||67.20%||164,573||32.80%||501,770||42.61%||1,391,100||Yes|
|North Carolina||Amendment 1||Marriage and
|May 8, 2012||1,317,178||61.04%||840,802||38.96%||2,157,980||34.66%||6,296,759||Yes|
|North Dakota||Constitutional Measure 1||Marriage and
|November 2, 2004||223,572||73.23%||81,716||26.77%||305,288||63.24%||482,722||Yes|
|Ohio||State Issue 1||Marriage and
|November 2, 2004||3,329,335||61.71%||2,065,462||38.29%||5,394,797||64.01%||8,427,696||Yes|
|Oklahoma||State Question 711||Marriage and
|November 2, 2004||1,075,216||75.58%||347,303||24.42%||1,422,519||56.65%||2,510,823||Yes|
|Oregon||Measure 36||Marriage||November 2, 2004||1,028,546||56.63%||787,556||43.37%||1,816,102||71.19%||2,550,887||Yes|
|South Carolina||Amendment 1||Marriage and
|November 7, 2006||829,360||77.97%||234,316||22.03%||1,063,676||33.74%||3,152,046||Yes|
|South Dakota||Amendment C||All types of same-sex unions||November 7, 2006||172,305||51.83%||160,152||48.17%||332,457||57.26%||580,592||Yes|
|Tennessee||Amendment 1||Marriage||November 7, 2006||1,419,434||81.3%||327,536||18.7%||1,746,970||39.4%||4,433,921||Yes|
|Texas||Proposition 2||Marriage and
|November 8, 2005||1,723,782||76.25%||536,913||23.74%||2,260,695||17.97%||12,577,545||Yes|
|Utah||Constitutional Amendment 3||Marriage and
|November 2, 2004||593,297||65.86%||307,488||34.14%||900,785||57.21%||1,574,463||Yes5|
|Virginia||Marshall-Newman Amendment||All types of same-sex unions||November 7, 2006||1,328,537||57.06%||999,687||42.94%||2,328,224||43.23%||5,385,522||Yes|
|Wisconsin||Referendum 1||Marriage and
|November 7, 2006||1,264,310||59.4%||862,924||40.6%||2,127,234||52.33%||4,064,432||Yes|
- 1 On June 26, 2015, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in the case of Obergefell v. Hodges that a fundamental right to marry is guaranteed to same-sex couples by the Fourteenth Amendment, and that states must allow same-sex marriage.
- 2 On June 26, 2013, the United States Supreme Court ruled that supporters of the measure did not have standing in federal court to defend the August 2010 ruling by Northern District of California's Chief Judge Vaughn Walker that the amendment was unconstitutional under both the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment, effectively killing the ballot initiative.
- 3 Does not explicitly define marriage, but allows the legislature to define marriage.
- 4 On June 28, 2013, U.S. District Judge David M. Lawson issued a preliminary injunction blocking the state from enforcing its law banning local governments and school districts from offering health benefits to their employees' domestic partners.
- 5 On December 20, 2013, Judge Robert J. Shelby of Federal District Court for the District of Utah, issued a 53-page ruling that said Utah's law, which was passed by voters in 2004, violated the US Constitutional rights of gay and lesbian couples to due process and equal protection under the 14th Amendment.
Proposed attempts to constitutionally block same-sex unions
|Delaware||2009||A proposed constitutional amendment, Senate Bill 27, to ban same-sex marriage failed.||Failed|
|2014||On February 15, 2011, the Indiana House approved a ban on civil unions and marriage (70-26). The bill passed the Indiana Senate by a 40-10 vote. According to state law, the bill must now be approved by the next, separately elected legislature before voters will see the measure on the 2014 ballot. On January 27, 2014, the Indiana House voted 52-43 to remove the ban on civil unions from the proposed measure. On January 28, 2014, the Indiana House voted 57-40 in favor of the amended measure. On February 17, 2014, the Indiana Senate voted 32-17 approving the House-amended version of the ban on gay marriage. The measure will now need to be approved by the next, separately elected legislature before voters are allowed to decide its fate in 2016.||Failed|
|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 House and fell one seat short of taking over the 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 in the house by a vote of 70-62, and was placed on the ballot in the November 2012 election.||Failed|
|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|
|2014||A joint resolution was prefiled in the New Mexico legislature for the 2014 session. The resolution would define marriage as one man and one woman for the state of New Mexico.||Failed|
|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 amendment must receive a majority vote from both chambers of the legislature in two consecutive sessions before voters are allowed to decide its fate. The soonest voters could see the measure is in 2015.||Failed|
|West Virginia senators 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 statute
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||Yes2 3|
- 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.
- 3 Subsequently repealed by state legislature.
Lawsuits seeking to overturn statutory bans
This article may be confusing or unclear to readers. (October 2009) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)
The following lists cases seeking to overturn marriage bans:
|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 Arizona||May 25, 2004||Failed||Arizona Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal of a unanimous 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 recognition of out-of-state same-sex marriages.||Recognition upheld||Continuing the recognition of same-sex marriages abroad.|
|Wisconsin||Appling v. Doyle||July 31, 2014||7||0||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. On July 31, 2014, the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled unanimously that the domestic partnership law does not violate the state's constitutional ban on same-sex marriage.||Recognition upheld||Wisconsin's domestic partnership law is upheld.|
|Montana||Donaldson and Guggenheim v. State of Montana||December 2012||3||4||Montana Supreme Court affirmed a lower court's dismissal of this case because the plaintiffs had not identified specific state statutes in their complaint. They did not seek the right to marry, but equal treatment for same-sex couples with respect to inheritance rights, health care decisions, and parenting. The Court invited the plaintiffs to file an amended complaint citing specific statutes, which the plaintiffs, did on April 16, 2013.||No||Pending (Lewis and Clark County District Court)|
|New Mexico||Griego v. Oliver||December 19, 2013||5||0||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. On 19 December 2013 New Mexico's Supreme Court declared that denying marriage to same-sex couples is unconstitutional in the state.||Yes||Legalized same-sex marriage in New Mexico on December 19, 2013|
|Texas||In Re Marriage of J.B. and H.B.||June 19, 2015||n/a||n/a||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. On July 3, 2013, the Texas Supreme Court sua sponte ordered supplemental merits briefing in light of United States v. Windsor.||Case dismissed on June 19, 2015 because a Petitioner died.|
|Texas||Texas v. Naylor||June 19, 2015||5||3||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.||Third Court of Appeals upheld in a 5-3 decision on June 19, 2015. The Court ruled that the Texas government had no standing to intervene in the divorce.|
- 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 marriage in tribal nations in the United States
- Same-sex union legislation
- Divorce of same-sex couples
- 1 U.S.C. § 7
- 28 U.S.C. § 1738C
- Foley, Elise (March 16, 2011). "Democrats Aim For DOMA Repeal". Huffington Post.
- Petition for Certiorari (No 12-307). Retrieved December 8, 2012
- Liptak, Adam (June 26, 2013). "Supreme Court Bolsters Gay Marriage With Two Major Rulings". New York Times. Retrieved June 26, 2013.
- "Weber Introduces "State Marriage Defense Act of 2014"". Press Releases. US House of Representatives. Retrieved January 16, 2014.
- Bradley, Gerard V. (January 10, 2014). "The State Marriage Defense Act, January 10, 2014". Witherspoon Institute. Retrieved January 16, 2014.
- Liptak, Adam (June 26, 2015). "Supreme Court Ruling Makes Same-Sex Marriage a Right Nationwide". New York Times. Retrieved June 28, 2015.
- 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
- CHAPTER 110/2001
- California Senate Bill 1049, 2001
- California Assembly Bill 25, 2001
- California Senate Bill 1575, 2002
- California Assembly Bill 2216, 2002
- D.C. Law 15-17. Health-Care Decisions Act of 2003
- California Assembly Bill 205, 2003
- New Jersey Domestic Partnership Act
- Summary of LD 1579
- D.C. Law 15-176. Deed Recordation Tax and Related Amendments Amendment Act of 2004
- California Assembly Bill 2208, 2004
- D.C. Law 15-307. Department of Motor Vehicles Reform Amendment Act of 2004
- D.C. Law 15-309. Domestic Partnership Protection Amendment Act of 2004
- House passes bill; reactions; bill signed into law
- Ehrlich Vetoes Bill Extending Rights to Gay Couples
- California Assembly Bill 19, 2005
- S 0146
- 2005 Bill Status: Senate Bills 1-299
- S 1209
- 2005 Bill Status: Senate Bills 1200 - 1237
- California Assembly Bill 849, 2005
- California Senate Bill 565, 2005
- California Senate Bill 973, 2005
- D.C. Law 16-59. DOMESTIC PARTNER HEALTH CARE BENEFITS TAX EXEMPTION ACT OF 2005
- P.L. 2005, CHAPTER 331
- D.C. Law 16-79. Domestic Partnership Equality Amendment Act of 2006
- Summary of LD 1842
- Chapter 157/2006 -- H 7679
- 2006 Bill Status: House Bills 7600 - 7899
- Chapter 189/2006 -- H 7804
- Chapter 316/2006 -- S 2713
- 2006 Bill Status: Senate Bills 2601 - 2900
- Chapter 631/2006 -- S 2717
- Chapter 645/2006 -- S 2229
- 2006 Bill Status: Senate Bills 2001 - 2300
- 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.
- D.C. Law 16-292. Domestic Partnerships Joint Filing Act of 2006
- Bill status of HB905
- SB 5336 - 2007-08
- Sklar, Roberta (May 2, 2007). "Task Force hails Oregon Senate passage of domestic partnership legislation covering same-sex couples". The Task Force. Archived from the original on November 4, 2009. Retrieved November 4, 2009.
- Summary of LD 663
- Bill status of HB437
- Summary of LD 375
- Summary of LD 1862
- "New York governor to propose legalizing same-sex marriage". CNN. April 14, 2009. Retrieved November 4, 2009.
- Chapter 476/2007 -- S 729
- 2007 Bill Status: Senate Bills 600 - 899
- California Assembly Bill 43, 2007
- California Assembly Bill 102, 2007
- Chapter 510/2007 -- S 0619
- 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. Archived from the original on November 6, 2009. Retrieved November 4, 2009.
- Luna, Brad (March 13, 2008). "WA domestic partnership expansion bill signed into law". Free Press. Retrieved November 4, 2009.
- HB 3104 - 2007-08
- Summary of LD 1953
- House Bill 746
- "Senate Bill 566".
- Senate Bill 597
- Jantzen, M. V. (May 16, 2008). "D.C. Council Passes Domestic Partner Law Expansion". DCist. Archived from the original on February 19, 2010. Retrieved November 4, 2009.
- Terrell, Steven (February 26, 2009). "Domestic partnership bill fails in Senate". Santa Fe New Mexican. Archived from the original on May 23, 2011. 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.
- D.C. Law 18-9. Jury and Marriage Amendment Act of 2009
- "Washington Expands Domestic Partnerships, Offers Almost-Marriage". Family Fairness. April 16, 2009. Archived from the original on February 12, 2011. Retrieved November 4, 2009.
- D.C. Law 18-33. Domestic Partnership Judicial Determination of Parentage Amendment Act of 2009
- Summary of LD 982
- "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
- A00904 A00904
- 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.
- Chapter 369/2009 -- S 0195
- 2009 Bill Status: Senate Bills 1-299
- Chapter 385/2009 -- H 5294
- 2009 Bill Status: House Bills 5000-5299
- Senate Bill 7773
- "Gay marriage bill up for vote in NJ next week". Google. Associated Press. December 3, 2009.
- Assembly Bill 7729
- Assembly Bill 4089
- Citing Marriage, Tim Pawlenty Rejects Gay Rights Bill
- Hawaii Senate passes civil-unions bill with veto-proof majority, 18-7[permanent dead link]
- A02563 A02563
- Bill 2563
- 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[permanent dead link]
- 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
- Assembly Bill 464
- Clarifying and expanding the rights and obligations of state registered domestic partners and other couples related to parentage
- Senate Bill 30
- Senate Bill 391
- 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
- "Washington becomes seventh state to recognize same-sex marriages". Thegavoice.com. February 13, 2012. Retrieved January 6, 2014.
- Same-Sex Marriage On New Jersey Senate Agenda
- Gay-marriage battle heating up in several states, including Maine
- "Archived copy". Archived from the original on January 11, 2019. Retrieved September 11, 2017.CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)
- Senate Bill 1599
- 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. Archived from the original on March 21, 2013.
- House Bill 5015 and Senate Bill 38.
- House Bill 75
- Bill Status for HF 1054.
- Assembly Bill 99
- Bill Status of SB1
- Bill Status of SB10
- Long, Ray; Rafael Guerrero (February 14, 2013). "Illinois Senate approves gay marriage - chicagotribune.com". Chicago Tribune. Retrieved February 14, 2013.
- Assembly Bill 7100
- Wyoming House defeats bill aimed at legalizing same-sex marriages
- Assembly Bill 4024
- "Calif. Senate advances bill to remove 'man and woman' from marriage laws". LGBTQ Nation. May 1, 2014.
- "Legislation updates California marriage laws". The Sacramento Bee. June 30, 2014. Archived from the original on July 14, 2014.
- "New law updates state code to use gender-neutral marriage terms". Los Angeles Times. July 7, 2014.
- SB 1211 Gender-specific references; revisions to certain terms in the Code of Virginia
- Rare win for LGBTQ Virginians as two equality bills pass full Senate vote
- Va. Delegate speaks out on discrimination as last two LGBT bills are killed
- Senate Bill 269
- Senate Bill 279
- SB 279
- Senate Bill 307
- Senate Bill 406
- Senate Bill 866
- Actions for LD 1017
- House Bill 2478
- Guam passes marriage equality and employment nondiscrimination acts
- Guam lawmakers pass LGBT bills
- passes Marriage Equality Act
- Assembly Bill 7645
- D.C. Law 21-105. Domestic Partnership Termination Recognition Amendment Act of 2015
- "Legislature reinforces same-sex marriage". Statesman Journal. February 25, 2016.
- House Bill 4127
- Assembly Bill 5476
- Senate Bill 150
- Governor signs raft of bills
- House Bill 1061
- SB-1005 Marriage
- SB 1005: Modernizing Code Language to Reflect Marriage Equality
- Bill Actions for SB 2043
- North Dakota Rejects Changes to Reflect Gay Marriage Ruling Archived January 11, 2017, at the Wayback Machine
- House Bill 412
- HB 412
- House Bill 150
- Senate Bill 147
- Senate Bill 237
- House Bill 1104
- Senate Bill 79
- Senate Bill 4407
- Senate Bill 1238
- House Bill 229
- Summary of LD 1616
- Senate Bill 276
- House Bill 201
- Senate Bill 27
- Senate Bill 221
- Senate Bill 54
- House Bill 293
- House Bill 4385
- Senate Bill 482
- Senate Bill 5858
- Docket of HB1587
- Senate Bill 366
- Legislature Bill 111
- House Bill 419
- HB 1979 Assisted conception; amends statute to provide gender-neutral terminology, etc.
- House Bill 6
- Legislature Bill 127
- House Bill 234
- House Bill 422
- SB 503
- Senate Bill 697
- House Bill 519
- House Bill 2468
- Legislature Bill 427
- Legislature Bill 533
- HF 5
- House Bill 5
- Senate Bill 789
- An Act To Update the Laws Regarding Death and Marriage Records
- Senate Bill 94
- Senate Bill 300
- House Bill 979
- Assembly Bill 2566
- House Bill 686
- House Bill 158
- Legislature Bill 387
- House Bill 146
- HB 1490
- SB 17
- SB 247
- House Bill 234
- Senate Bill 65
- HB 1580
- Senate Bill 7506
- Gestational Surrogacy Legalized in New York State
- HB 623
- Senate Bill 7168
- Puerto Rico approves new civil code, sparking fears over LGBT+ rights
- Wanda Vázquez convirtió en ley el Código Civil
- Senate Bill 595
- Docket of HB1162
- Senate Bill 2136
- House Bill 7541
- Assembly Joint Resolution 2 of the 79th (2017) Session
- Bill S.77
- Bill H.139
- Assembly Bill 3229
- "Maryland". Marriage-law.laws.com. Retrieved January 6, 2014.
- HB 103, 63rd Regular Session
- Texas’ First Anti-Marriage Law
- SAME-SEX MARRIAGE LAWS IN THE UNITED STATES (Current as of December 31, 2013) Archived April 16, 2014, at the Wayback Machine
- "Legal Marriage Court Cases". Partners Task Force for Gay and Lesbian Couples. July 10, 2011. Retrieved April 11, 2014.
- "Ban on gay marriage passes". Fredericksburg.com. November 7, 2006. Archived from the original on April 11, 2013. Retrieved January 6, 2014.
- Utah will ask Supreme Court to stop gay marriage during appeal
- Same-Sex Marriages Banned by Fla. House
- Bills OK'd Barring Homosexual marriage, adoption
- Askew signs bill to ban gay marriage
- Baim, Tracy (2010). Obama and the Gays: A Political Marriage. Create Space. p. 8.
- Homosexual Marriage Ban Signed
- "Overview of Gay Marriage". Lgbt-vmmlegal.com. Archived from the original on April 16, 2013. Retrieved 2014-01-06.
- This Is Where Marriage Equality Stands on Its 10th Birthday
- New Hampshire
- DOMESTIC RELATIONS CHAPTER 457 MARRIAGES
- New Hampshire Senate Bill 557, 1994
- "Archived copy". Archived from the original on April 16, 2015. Retrieved April 16, 2015.CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)
- Hawaii bans same-sex marriages
- Utah may ignore gay unions
- State Laws Prohibiting Recognition of Same-Sex Relationships
- DEFINITION OR DISCRIMINATION? STATE MARRIAGE RECOGNITION STATUTES IN THE "SAME-SEX MARRIAGE" DEBATE
- House Bill 1143
- UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF IDAHO
- Batt signs law banning recognition of same-sex marriage
- "The Union Democrat - Google News Archive Search".
- Lawmakers say no to same-sex marriages
- Georgia House of Representatives - 1995/1996 Sessions
- BILL STATUS OVERVIEW SB1038
- Alaska Bars Gay Marriage, Congress To Debate Issue
- Chapter 25.05. ALASKA MARRIAGE CODE Article 01 REQUIREMENTS FOR MARRIAGE Sec. 25.05.013. Same-sex marriages
- 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
- Senate Bill 1487 / S.L. 1995-588 (= H1452) S1
- 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
- HB1004 - AN ACT TO PROVIDE THAT MARRIAGE SHALL ONLY BE BETWEEN A MAN AND WOMAN; AND TO REFUSE TO RECOGNIZE FOREIGN MARRIAGES BETWEEN PERSONS OF THE SAME SEX.
- PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO SENATE BILL NO. 2230
- SRC-AAA S.B. 334 75(R) BILL ANALYSIS
- Locke's veto of gay marriage ban stands
- HB 1589 Same sex marriages.
- "Gay-marriage ban called irrelevant". Boston Globe. April 1, 1997.
- . May 14, 1997 http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_product=FW&s_site=fortwayne&p_multi=FW&p_theme=realcities&p_action=search&p_maxdocs=200&p_topdoc=1&p_text_direct-0=0EB6CDA4BA6FCDEF&p_field_direct-0=document_id&p_perpage=10&p_sort=YMD_date:D&s_trackval=GooglePM. Missing or empty
- HB 1265 Passes Indiana House & Senate
- HOUSE JOURNAL ADDENDUM COMMUNICATIONS AND PETITIONS OFFICE OF THE SPEAKER
- Chiles lets gay marriage ban stand
- Resources on Minnesota Issues Same-Sex Marriage in Minnesota
- Gay marriage ban vetoed
- "Washington Bans Gay Marriage". Chicago Tribune. February 8, 1998.
- Veto Vote
- Kentucky 1998 Regular Session; HB13
- "The Tuscaloosa News - Google News Archive Search".
- 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
- American Samoa Senate rejects bill outlawing same sex marriages
- New Hampshire House Bill 553, 2003
- Perry Signs 'Defense of Marriage
- "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 Archived September 29, 2011, at the Wayback Machine
- HB 751 Marriage; affirmation.
- 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 Archived March 22, 2012, at the Wayback Machine
- Maine Question 1, 2012
- "Indiana General Assembly". In.gov. February 3, 2004. Retrieved January 6, 2014.
- "Resource record: Utah Puts Same-Sex Marriage Issue to Voters". Gis.state.mn.us. Retrieved January 6, 2014.
- "Senate gives final passage to marriage amendment". Enquirer.com. April 15, 2004. Retrieved January 6, 2014.
- "04RS SB245". Lrc.ky.gov. Retrieved January 6, 2014.
- "Same-sex marriage ban going to voters Nov. 8 - Houston Chronicle". Chron.com. May 22, 2005. Retrieved January 6, 2014.
- "Idaho HJR 2 - Marriage Amendment Ballot Question - Key Vote - Project Vote Smart". Votesmart.org. Retrieved January 6, 2014.
- SB 526 - Defining Marriage - Key Vote
- HB 2381 - Marriage Definition Constitutional Amendment - Key Vote
- JARED MILLER Star-Tribune capital bureau (February 7, 2009). "Gay marriage ban falls in House". Trib.com. Retrieved January 6, 2014.
- "West Virginia defeats marriage amendment | The Bilerico Project". Bilerico.com. March 31, 2009. Retrieved January 6, 2014.
- NIKI KELLY (January 29, 2010). "Amendment prohibiting gay marriage clears Senate". The Journal Gazette. Retrieved January 6, 2014.
- Garcia, Michelle (February 17, 2010). "NH House Rejects Gay Marriage Ban". Advocate.com. Retrieved January 6, 2014.
- Fankhauser, Chris (January 27, 2011). "Chadrad.com". Chadrad.com. Retrieved January 6, 2014.
- NC General Assembly webmasters. "North Carolina General Assembly - Senate Bill 514 Information/History (2011-2012 Session)". Ncga.state.nc.us. Retrieved January 6, 2014.
- Star Tribune, Tom Wallace (May 22, 2011). "Voters to determine the future of marriage, House decides". Star Tribune. Retrieved January 6, 2014.
- Indiana 3rd Reading House Marriage Amendment ONLY
- Carden, Dan (October 14, 2014). "Bosma declares marriage amendment dead". NWI. Retrieved October 17, 2014.
- White, Ed (June 28, 2013). "Mich. ban on domestic partner benefits blocked". Pioneer Press. Retrieved February 18, 2014.
- Lederman, Marty (July 1, 2013). "After Windsor: Michigan same-sex partners benefits suit advances". SCOTUSblog. Retrieved July 2, 2013.
- Eckholm, Erik (December 20, 2013). "Federal Judge Rules That Same-Sex Marriage Is Legal in Utah". The New York Times.
- Delaware Senate Defeats Gay Marriage Ban
- Indiana House Passes Gay Marriage Ban
- Indiana House amends marriage ban language
- Indiana House approves constitutional amendment to ban gay marriages
- Indiana Senate approves diluted gay marriage ban Archived February 21, 2014, at the Wayback Machine
- 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. Archived from the original on May 17, 2011.
- "House sends same-sex marriage ban to 2012 ballot". Minnesota Public Radio. May 22, 2011.
- NH House rejects two anti-gay marriage measures
- N.H. House Rejects Gay Marriage Ban
-  Archived January 4, 2014, at the Wayback Machine
- "SJR06". Nmlegis.gov. Retrieved January 6, 2014.
- "Bill Information (History) - House Bill 1349; Regular Session 2013-2014 - PA General Assembly". Legis.state.pa.us. May 8, 2013. Retrieved January 6, 2014.
- Daryl Metcalfe introduces anti-gay bill[permanent dead link]
- Lawmakers Study Amendment Banning Gay Marriage Archived May 16, 2011, at the Wayback Machine
- W.Va. Gay Marriage Ban Fails in House Archived December 21, 2011, at the Wayback Machine
- 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[permanent dead link]
- Full Results Archived October 11, 2009, at the Wayback Machine
- 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, Donald J.; et al. (2006). Same-Sex Marriage: The Legal and Psychological Evolution in America. Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press. pp. 117–8. ISBN 9780819568120. 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 Archived June 21, 2010, at the Wayback Machine
- Dean v. District of Columbia
- Baehr v. Miike, Circuit Court for the First Circuit, Hawaii No. 91-1394
- Oshiro, Sandra (December 6, 1996). "Hawaiian judge puts same-sex marriage ruling on hold". The Nation. Thailand: Reuter. p. A12. Retrieved August 18, 2010.
- 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 Archived March 3, 2012, at the Wayback Machine
- 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
- Kiritsky, Laura (October 16, 2003). "Gay marriage setback in Arizona". Bay Windows. Retrieved July 9, 2013.
- "Arizona high court upholds same-sex marriage ban". The Advocate. May 27, 2004. Retrieved July 9, 2013.
- Same-Sex Marriage in Louisiana
- Mary Li and Rebecca Kennedy, et al. v. State of Oregon, et al.
- "Hernandez v Robles (2006 NY Slip Op 05239)". Courts.state.ny.us. Retrieved January 6, 2014.
- Perdue v. O'Kelley, 280 Ga. 732 (2006) Archived March 27, 2009, at the Wayback Machine
- 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 Archived March 17, 2012, at the Wayback Machine, 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
- Belczyk, Jaclyn (May 18, 2012). "Maryland high court grants same-sex divorce". The Jurist. Retrieved March 1, 2015.
- "Domestic partnership registry lawsuit rejected", Green Bay Press Gazette Accessed 8 November 2009.
- Judge rules Wisconsin same sex registry is constitutional
- Marley, Patrick (December 21, 2012). "Wisconsin appeals court upholds domestic partner registry". Jsonline.com. Retrieved January 6, 2014.
- "Wisconsin Supreme Court upholds state's domestic partner registry". jsonline.com. July 31, 2014. Retrieved July 31, 2014.
- "Montana Supreme Court rejects equal benefits for gay couples". Missoulian. December 18, 2012. Retrieved July 17, 2013.
- "ACLU sues state of Montana over benefits for gay couples". Missoulian. July 16, 2013. Retrieved July 17, 2013.
- https://web.archive.org/web/20130323001646/http://www.nclrights.org/site/PageNavigator/issues_and_cases/Cases/issue_caseDocket_griego_v_oliver.html. Archived from the original on March 23, 2013. Retrieved February 19, 2016. Missing or empty
- 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. Archived from the original on August 20, 2012. Retrieved January 18, 2013.
- Order for Supplementary Briefing by Texas Supreme Court July 3, 2013 Accessed July 8, 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. Archived from the original on October 20, 2013. Retrieved January 19, 2013.
- Rozen, Miriam (December 17, 2012). "Lawyer in two same-sex divorce cases awaits Texas Supreme Court decision on petitions for review". Texas Lawyer. Archived from the original on October 20, 2013. Retrieved January 18, 2013.