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, all such legislation was made irrelevant when 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.
- 1 Federal level
- 2 State level
- 2.1 Efforts to enable same-sex unions
- 2.2 Efforts to prohibit same-sex unions
- 2.3 Attempts to establish same-sex unions via initiative or statewide referendum
- 2.4 Efforts to enable ban amendment
- 2.5 Efforts to ban same-sex unions by constitutional amendment
- 2.6 Recent, pending, or proposed attempts to constitutionally block same-sex unions
- 2.7 Efforts to ban same-sex unions by statute
- 2.8 Lawsuits seeking to overturn statutory bans
- 3 See also
- 4 References
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|
|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||—||—||Failed||—||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||—||—||85||61||—||No|
|California||October 2007||Domestic partnership (expansion)||Passed||Passed||Signed||Yes|
|New Hampshire||January 2008||Contractual cohabitation||Failed||—||—||—||No|
|New Mexico||February 2008||Domestic partnership||—||—||33||31||—||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)||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||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||—||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||—||—||—||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||—||—||Failed||—||No|
|Colorado||March 2011||Civil union||23||12||—||—||—||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||No|
|Colorado||May 2012||Civil union||23||12||—||—||—||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|
|California||July 2014||Marriage (codification)||25||10||51||11||Signed||Yes|
|Virginia||February 2015||Marriage (codification)||20||18||—||—||—||No|
|Oregon||July 2015||Marriage (codification)||18||11||40||18||Signed||Yes|
|Guam||August 2015||Marriage (codification)||N/A||13||2||N/A4||Yes|
|Oregon||March 2016||Marriage (codification)||18||11||43||13||Signed||Yes|
|Colorado||June 2016||Conversion of civil union into marriage||34||0||52||13||Signed||Yes|
|California||June 2016||Marriage and domestic partnership (codification)||34||0||63||1||Signed||Yes|
|Puerto Rico||2016||Marriage (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||Yes1|
|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/A2||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/A2||Yes|
|Washington||February 1998||Marriage||34||11||65||28||Vetoed 3||Yes1|
|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/A2||Yes|
|New Hampshire||May 2004||Recognition of out-of-state marriage||16||7||215||137||Signed||Yes1|
|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|
- 1Subsequently repealed.
- 2The bill was allowed to lapse into law.
- 3Veto 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 but ruled unconstitutional.|
|Alaska||Ballot Measure 2||Marriage||November 3, 1998||152,965||68.1%||71,631||31.9%||224,596||50.11%||453,332||Yes but ruled unconstitutional.|
|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 but ruled unconstitutional.|
|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 but ruled unconstitutional.|
|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||Yes but ruled unconstitutional.1|
|Colorado||Amendment 43||Marriage||November 7, 2006||855,126||55.02%||699,030||44.98%||1,554,156||47.13%||3,297,308||Yes but ruled unconstitutional.|
|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 but ruled unconstitutional.|
|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 but ruled unconstitutional.|
|Hawaii||Constitutional Amendment 2||Marriage ban
|November 3, 1998||285,384||69.18%||117,827||28.56%||403,211||Yes 2|
|Idaho||Amendment 2||Marriage and
|November 7, 2006||282,386||63.4%||163,384||36.6%||445,770||49.04%||908,925||Yes but ruled unconstitutional.|
|Kansas||Proposed amendment 1||Marriage and
|April 5, 2005||417,675||69.94%||179,432||30.06%||597,107||Yes but ruled unconstitutional.|
|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 but ruled unconstitutional.|
|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 but ruled unconstitutional.|
|Michigan||State Proposal - 04-2||All types of same-sex unions||November 2, 2004||2,698,077||58.63%||1,904,319||41.37%||4,602,396||63.36%||7,263,024||Yes but ruled unconstitutional.|
|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 but ruled unconstitutional.|
|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 but ruled unconstitutional.|
|Montana||Initiative 96||Marriage||November 2, 2004||295,070||66.55%||148,263||33.45%||443,333||63.41%||699,114||Yes but ruled unconstitutional.|
|Nebraska||Initiative Measure 416||Marriage and
|November 7, 2000||450,07||70.36%||189,555||29.64%||639,628||52.24%||1,224,178||Yes but ruled unconstitutional.|
|Nevada||Question 2||Marriage||November 7, 2000||412,688||69.62%||180,077||30.38%||592,765||44.03%||1,346,116||Yes but ruled unconstitutional.|
|Nevada||Question 2||Marriage||November 7, 2002||337,197||67.20%||164,573||32.80%||501,770||42.61%||1,391,100||Yes but ruled unconstitutional.|
|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 but ruled unconstitutional.|
|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 but ruled unconstitutional.|
|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 but ruled unconstitutional.|
|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 but ruled unconstitutional.|
|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 but ruled unconstitutional.|
|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 but ruled unconstitutional.|
|South Dakota||Amendment C||Marriage and
|November 7, 2006||172,305||51.83%||160,152||48.17%||332,457||57.26%||580,592||Yes but ruled unconstitutional.|
|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 but ruled unconstitutional.|
|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 but ruled unconstitutional.|
|Utah||Constitutional Amendment 3||Marriage and
|November 2, 2004||593,297||65.86%||307,488||34.14%||900,785||57.21%||1,574,463||Yes but ruled unconstitutional.3|
|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 but ruled unconstitutional.|
|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 but ruled unconstitutional.|
- 1 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.
- 2 Does not explicitly define marriage, but allows the legislature to define marriage.
- 3 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.
Recent, pending, or 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 by 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||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) (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 union legislation
- 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. "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
- 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
- "Washington becomes seventh state to recognize same-sex marriages". Thegavoice.com. 2012-02-13. Retrieved 2014-01-06.
- 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 SB1
- Bill Status of SB10
- Long, Ray; Rafael Guerrero (February 14, 2013). "Illinois Senate approves gay marriage - chicagotribune.com". Chicago Tribune. Retrieved 14 February 2013.
- Wyoming House defeats bill aimed at legalizing same-sex marriages
- "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.
- "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
- Open States
- House Bill 2478
- Guam passes marriage equality and employment nondiscrimination acts
- Guam lawmakers pass LGBT bills
- passes Marriage Equality Act
- "Legislature reinforces same-sex marriage". Statesman Journal. February 25, 2016.
- House Bill 4127
- 2016 Regular Session HB 4127 Overview
- Senate Bill 150
- Governor signs raft of bills
- SB-1005 Marriage
- SB 1005: Modernizing Code Language to Reflect Marriage Equality
- "Bill would update Alaska laws to reflect same-sex marriage rights". KTUU-TV. February 25, 2016.
- HOUSE BILL NO. 342
- State lawmakers move to overturn Michigan's ban on same-sex marriage
- MI HB4374 | 2015-2016 | 98th Legislature
- (Spanish) Para enmendar el Artículo 68 del Código Civil de Puerto Rico de 1930, según enmendado, a los fines de reconocer los matrimonios entre personas del mismo sexo, reconocer los matrimonios entre personas del mismo sexo contraídos en otras jurisdicciones conforme a lo establecido en Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U.S. ___ (2015); y para otros fines relacionados
- (Spanish) Para enmendar el Artículo 68 del Código Civil de Puerto Rico, según enmendado, a los fines de hacer justicia, atemperar y reconocer el matrimonio igualitario en la jurisdicción del Estado Libre Asociado de Puerto Rico
- "SB 10 Same-sex marriages; civil unions". Retrieved March 5, 2016.
- "Maryland". Marriage-law.laws.com. Retrieved 2014-01-06.
- SAME-SEX MARRIAGE LAWS IN THE UNITED STATES (Current as of December 31, 2013)
- "Legal Marriage Court Cases". Parters Task Force for Gay and Lesbian Couples. July 10, 2011. Retrieved 2014-04-11.
- "Ban on gay marriage passes". Fredericksburg.com. 2006-11-07. Retrieved 2014-01-06.
- 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. 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
- 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
- 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
- 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
- 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
- Maine Question 1, 2012
- "Indiana General Assembly". In.gov. 2004-02-03. Retrieved 2014-01-06.
- "Resource record: Utah Puts Same-Sex Marriage Issue to Voters". Gis.state.mn.us. Retrieved 2014-01-06.
- "Senate gives final passage to marriage amendment". Enquirer.com. 2004-04-15. Retrieved 2014-01-06.
- "04RS SB245". Lrc.ky.gov. Retrieved 2014-01-06.
- "Same-sex marriage ban going to voters Nov. 8 - Houston Chronicle". Chron.com. 2005-05-22. Retrieved 2014-01-06.
- "Idaho HJR 2 - Marriage Amendment Ballot Question - Key Vote - Project Vote Smart". Votesmart.org. Retrieved 2014-01-06.
- SB 526 - Defining Marriage - Key Vote
- HB 2381 - Marriage Definition Constitutional Amendment - Key Vote
- JARED MILLER Star-Tribune capital bureau (2009-02-07). "Gay marriage ban falls in House". Trib.com. Retrieved 2014-01-06.
- "West Virginia defeats marriage amendment | The Bilerico Project". Bilerico.com. 2009-03-31. Retrieved 2014-01-06.
- NIKI KELLY (2010-01-29). "Amendment prohibiting gay marriage clears Senate". The Journal Gazette. Retrieved 2014-01-06.
- Garcia, Michelle (2010-02-17). "NH House Rejects Gay Marriage Ban". Advocate.com. Retrieved 2014-01-06.
- Fankhauser, Chris (2011-01-27). "Chadrad.com". Chadrad.com. Retrieved 2014-01-06.
- NC General Assembly webmasters. "North Carolina General Assembly - Senate Bill 514 Information/History (2011-2012 Session)". Ncga.state.nc.us. Retrieved 2014-01-06.
- Star Tribune, Tom Wallace (2011-05-22). "Voters to determine the future of marriage, House decides". Star Tribune. Retrieved 2014-01-06.
- Indiana 3rd Reading House Marriage Amendment ONLY
- Carden, Dan (14 October 2014). "Bosma declares marriage amendment dead". NWI. Retrieved 17 October 2014.
- 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
- 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 2014-01-06.
- "Bill Information (History) - House Bill 1349; Regular Session 2013-2014 - PA General Assembly". Legis.state.pa.us. 2013-05-08. Retrieved 2014-01-06.
- 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
- 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 2014-01-06.
- 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
- 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 (2012-12-21). "Wisconsin appeals court upholds domestic partner registry". Jsonline.com. Retrieved 2014-01-06.
- "Wisconsin Supreme Court upholds state's domestic partner registry". jsonline.com. 31 July 2014. Retrieved 31 July 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. 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. 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. Retrieved January 18, 2013.