2022: Fitzpatrick Voted To Replace The Federal Definition Of Marriage
With A Definition That Recognized All Valid Marriages In Every U.S.
State. In December 2022, according to Congressional Quarterly,
Fitzpatrick voted to concur with the Senate amendment to the Respect for
Marriage Act, which would "also replace the current federal definition
of marriage, which defines marriage as a union between one man and one
woman, to define a marriage as valid if it is between two individuals
and valid in the place where the marriage was entered into and would be
considered valid in a U.S. state." The vote was on a motion to concur.
The House concurred with the Senate by a vote of 258-169, thus the bill
was sent to President Biden and it ultimately became law. [House Vote
513, 12/8/22;
Congressional Quarterly,
12/8/22; Congressional
Actions, S.Amdt.
6487;
Congressional Actions, H.R.
8404]
The Bill Would Repeal The Defense Of Marriage Act Of 1996, Which
Defined Marriage Between One Man And One Woman And Was Previously
Struck Down But Remained In Federal Code. According to The New
York Times, "The legislation passed on Tuesday would repeal the
Defense of Marriage Act of 1996, which defined a marriage as the
union between a man and a woman, a law that was struck down by the
court but has remained on the books." [New York Times,
7/19/22]
The Bill Would Recognize Marriages If They Were Valid In The State
The Ceremony Was Performed, Which Would Recognize Marriages In
States That Would Prohibit Sex-Marriages If Obergefell Were To Be
Overturned. According to The New York Times, "The legislation
would mandate that the federal government recognize a marriage if it
was valid in the state where it was performed, which would address
the patchwork of differing state laws. That would protect same-sex
marriages in the roughly 30 states that currently prohibit them,
should the court overturn Obergefell." [New York Times,
7/19/22]
2022: Fitzpatrick Voted To Replace The Federal Definition Of Marriage
With A Definition That Recognized All Valid Marriages In Every U.S.
State. In July 2022, according to Congressional Quarterly, Fitzpatrick
voted for the Respect for Marriage Act, which would "also replace the
current federal definition of marriage, which defines marriage as a
union between one man and one woman, to define a marriage as valid if it
is valid in the place where the marriage was entered into and would be
considered valid in a U.S. state." The vote was on passage. The House
passed the bill by a vote 267-157, thus the bill was sent to the Senate.
The Senate passed the bill, sent the bill to President Biden, and it
ultimately became law. [House Vote 373,
7/19/22; Congressional
Quarterly, 7/19/22;
Congressional Actions, H.R.
8404]
The Bill Would Repeal The Defense Of Marriage Act Of 1996, Which
Defined Marriage Between One Man And One Woman And Was Previously
Struck Down But Remained In Federal Code. According to The New
York Times, "The legislation passed on Tuesday would repeal the
Defense of Marriage Act of 1996, which defined a marriage as the
union between a man and a woman, a law that was struck down by the
court but has remained on the books." [New York Times,
7/19/22]
The Bill Would Recognize Marriages If They Were Valid In The State
The Ceremony Was Performed, Which Would Recognize Marriages In
States That Would Prohibit Sex-Marriages If Obergefell Were To Be
Overturned. According to The New York Times, "The legislation
would mandate that the federal government recognize a marriage if it
was valid in the state where it was performed, which would address
the patchwork of differing state laws. That would protect same-sex
marriages in the roughly 30 states that currently prohibit them,
should the court overturn Obergefell." [New York Times,
7/19/22]
2022: Fitzpatrick Effectively Voted For The Respect For Marriage
Act. In December 2022, according to Congressional Quarterly,
Fitzpatrick voted for the "motion to table the Perlmutter, D-Colo.,
motion to reconsider the vote by which the House agreed, 258-169, to
concur in the Senate amendment to the bill." The vote was on a moton to
table a motion to reconsider the previous vote. The House agreed to the
motion by a vote of 224-164, thus the previous passage vote of H.R. 8404
was not reconsidered and the bill remained as passed. [House Vote 514,
12/8/22; Congressional
Quarterly, 12/8/22;
Congressional Actions, H.R.
8404]
2022: Fitzpatrick Voted To Codify The Right To Marry, Regardless Of
Sexual Orientation Or Race And Prohibit Individuals Acting Under State
Law From Refusing To Recognize A Same-Sex Or Interracial Marriage. In
December 2022, according to Congressional Quarterly, Fitzpatrick voted
to concur with the Senate amendment to the Respect for Marriage Act,
which would "codify the right to marry, regardless of sexual orientation
or race. Specifically, it would prohibit any person acting under color
of state law from denying full faith and credit to, or any rights based
on, a marriage between two individuals on the basis of the individuals'
sex, race, ethnicity or national origin. It would allow the U.S.
attorney general or a harmed individual to bring a civil action in U.S.
district court for declaratory and injunctive relief against an
individual who violates these provisions. The bill would also replace
the current federal definition of marriage, which defines marriage as a
union between one man and one woman, to define a marriage as valid if it
is between two individuals and valid in the place where the marriage was
entered into and would be considered valid in a U.S. state. It would
specify that no provisions in the bill may be construed to diminish or
abrogate religious liberty and that religious organizations and their
employees would not be required to provide services for the celebration
of a marriage, consistent with First Amendment protections. It would
also specify that the bill would not authorize federal recognition of
polygamous marriage and that it would not impact any benefits, status or
rights that do not arise from marriage." The vote was on a motion to
concur. The House concurred with the Senate by a vote of 258-169, thus
the bill was sent to President Biden and it ultimately became law.
[House Vote 513,
12/8/22; Congressional
Quarterly, 12/8/22;
Congressional Actions, S.Amdt.
6487;
Congressional Actions, H.R.
8404]
The Bill Did Not Recognize Polygamous Marriages And Did Not Impact
The Benefits, Status Or Rights That Do Not Derive From Marriage.
According to Congressional Quarterly, "It would also specify that
the bill would not authorize federal recognition of polygamous
marriage and that it would not impact any benefits, status or rights
that do not arise from marriage." [Congressional Quarterly,
12/8/22]
The Bill Would Not Require State To Legalize Same-Sex Marriage,
But Instead Required States To Recognize Out-Of-State Legal
Marriages. According to CNN, "While the bill would not set a
national requirement that all states must legalize same-sex
marriage, it would require individual states to recognize another
state's legal marriage." [CNN,
11/30/22]
If Obergefell V. Hodges Were To Be Overturned, And If A State Were
To Outlaw Same-Sex Marriage, The Respect For Marriage Act Would
Mandate Such State To Recognize Same-Sex Marriages That Were
Conducted In Other States. According to CNN, "So, in the event the
Supreme Court might overturn its 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges decision
that legalized same-sex marriage, a state could still pass a law to
ban same-sex marriage, but that state would be required to recognize
a same-sex marriage from another state." [CNN,
11/30/22]
Specifically, The Bill Was In Response To Justice Clarence Thomas'
Row V. Wade Concurring Opinion, In Which He Called For Obergefell To
Be Reconsidered. According to The New York Times, "It is a direct
answer to Justice Clarence Thomas's concurring opinion in last
month's ruling that overturned federal abortion rights, in which he
wrote that Obergefell and similar cases should be reconsidered."
[New York Times,
7/19/22]
While The Bill Did Not Fully Guarantee The Right To Marry, It
Required States To Recognize Out-Of-State Same-Sex Marriages And
Codified The Rights For Same-Sex Couples To Receive The Same Federal
Benefits Like Heterosexual Couples. According to NPR, "This bill
does not guarantee the right to marry. It makes it so that other
states have to recognize same-sex marriages across state lines and
that same-sex couples are entitled to the same federal benefits of
any other married couple, like Social Security survivor benefits."
[NPR,
12/13/22]
The Bill Would Not Prevent States From Banning Same-Sex Marriage
If The Supreme Court Overturns Obergefell. According to NPR,
"That's because, though the bill attempts to buttress key Supreme
Court decisions, it does nothing to prevent same-sex marriages from
becoming illegal again in states that might oppose them if the
Supreme Court decides to overturn Obergefell." [NPR,
12/13/22]
2022: Fitzpatrick Effectively Voted Against The Respect For Marriage
Act. In December 2022, according to Congressional Quarterly,
Fitzpatrick voted against the "adoption of the rule (H Res 1510) that
would provide for floor consideration of the Respect for Marriage Act
(HR 8404). The rule would provide for up to one hour of debate on a
motion to concur in the Senate amendment to HR 8404." The vote was on
the adoption of the rule. The House adopted the rule by a vote of
217-204. [House Vote 512,
12/7/22; Congressional
Quarterly, 12/7/22;
Congressional Actions, H.Res.
1510;
Congressional Actions, H.R.
8404]
2022: Fitzpatrick Voted To Codify The Right To Marry, Regardless Of
Sexual Orientation, Race, Ethnicity Or National Origin. In July 2022,
according to Congressional Quarterly, Fitzpatrick voted for the Respect
for Marriage Act, which would "codify the right to marry, regardless of
sexual orientation or race. Specifically, it would prohibit any person
acting under color of state law from denying full faith and credit to,
or any rights based on, a marriage between two individuals on the basis
of the individuals' sex, race, ethnicity or national origin." The vote
was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote 267-157, thus the
bill was sent to the Senate. The Senate passed the bill, sent the bill
to President Biden, and it ultimately became law. [House Vote 373,
7/19/22; Congressional
Quarterly, 7/19/22;
Congressional Actions, H.R.
8404]
The Bill Would Allow The U.S. Attorney General Or A Harmed Person
To Sue In Federal Court For "Declaratory And Injustice Relief"
Against Anyone That Denies The Right To Marry. According to
Congressional Quarterly, "It would allow the U.S. attorney general
or a harmed individual to bring a civil action in U.S. district
court for declaratory and injunctive relief against an individual
who violates these provisions." [Congressional Quarterly,
7/19/22]
The Bill Was In Response To Concerns That A Right-Wing U.S.
Supreme Court Could Overturn Marriage Equality. According to The
New York Times, "The House on Tuesday passed a bill that would
recognize same-sex marriages at the federal level, with a bipartisan
coalition supporting a measure that addresses growing concerns that
a conservative Supreme Court could nullify marriage equality." [New
York Times,
7/19/22]
The Bill Would Codify The 2015 Supreme Court Landmark Case
Obergefell V. Hodges, Which Protected Gay Marriage As A 14th
Amendment Right. According to The New York Times, "Forty-seven
Republicans joined Democrats in backing the bill, the Respect for
Marriage Act, which would codify the federal protections for
same-sex couples that were put in place in 2015, when the Supreme
Court ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges established same-sex marriage
as a right under the 14th Amendment." [New York Times,
7/19/22]
Specifically, The Bill Was In Response To Justice Clarence Thomas'
Row V. Wade Concurring Opinion, In Which He Called For Obergefell To
Be Reconsidered. According to The New York Times, "It is a direct
answer to Justice Clarence Thomas's concurring opinion in last
month's ruling that overturned federal abortion rights, in which he
wrote that Obergefell and similar cases should be reconsidered."
[New York Times,
7/19/22]
House Republican Leadership Split On The Bill, With The Top Two
Leaders Opposing The Bill And The Remaining Leaders Supporting It.
According to The New York Times, "The party's leaders split on the
bill. The top two Republicans, Representatives Kevin McCarthy of
California and Steve Scalise of Louisiana, voted no. But the No. 3
Republican, Representative Elise Stefanik of New York, and
Representative Tom Emmer of Minnesota, the G.O.P. campaign committee
chairman, were in favor. Representative Liz Cheney of Wyoming also
voted for the bill." [New York Times,
7/19/22]
The Bill Would Provide The U.S. Attorney General The Authority To
Enforce The Bill. According to The New York Times, "The bill also
would provide additional legal protections to same-sex couples, such
as giving the attorney general the authority to pursue enforcement
actions and ensuring that all states recognize public acts, records
and judicial proceedings for out-of-state marriages." [New York
Times,
7/19/22]
2022: Fitzpatrick Effectively Voted Against Codifying Marriage
Equality. In July 2022, according to Congressional Quarterly,
Fitzpatrick voted against the "adoption of the rule (H Res 1232) that
would provide for one hour of general debate on each bill." The vote was
on the adoption of the rule. The House adopted the rule by a vote
219-200. [House Vote 366,
7/19/22; Congressional
Quarterly, 7/19/22;
Congressional Actions, H.R.
8404;
Congressional Actions, H.Res.
1232]
2022: Fitzpatrick Effectively Voted Against Codifying Marriage
Equality. In July 2022, according to Congressional Quarterly,
Fitzpatrick voted against the "motion to order the previous question
(thus ending debate and possibility of amendment) on the rule (H Res
1232) that would provide for one hour of general debate on each bill."
The vote was on a motion to order the previous question. The House
agreed to the motion by a vote 219-199. [House Vote 365,
7/19/22; Congressional
Quarterly, 7/19/22;
Congressional Actions, H.R.
8404;
Congressional Actions, H.Res.
1232]
2022: Fitzpatrick Voted To Allow The U.S. Attorney General Or Harmed
Individuals To Sue In Federal Court For Declaratory And Injunctive
Relief Against People Who Violate The Right To Marry Or Refuse To
Recognize Same-Sex Or Interracial Marriage. In December 2022,
according to Congressional Quarterly, Fitzpatrick voted to concur with
the Senate amendment to the Respect for Marriage Act, which would "allow
the U.S. attorney general or a harmed individual to bring a civil action
in U.S. district court for declaratory and injunctive relief against an
individual who violates these provisions." The vote was on a motion to
concur. The House concurred with the Senate by a vote of 258-169, thus
the bill was sent to President Biden and it ultimately became law.
[House Vote 513,
12/8/22; Congressional
Quarterly, 12/8/22;
Congressional Actions, S.Amdt.
6487;
Congressional Actions, H.R.
8404]
2022: Fitzpatrick Voted To Protect Religious Liberty In Relation To
Marriage Equality And Prohibit Mandates For Religious Organizations To
Provide Celebratory Marriage Services. In December 2022, according to
Congressional Quarterly, Fitzpatrick voted to concur with the Senate
amendment to the Respect for Marriage Act, which would "specify that no
provisions in the bill may be construed to diminish or abrogate
religious liberty and that religious organizations and their employees
would not be required to provide services for the celebration of a
marriage, consistent with First Amendment protections." The vote was on
a motion to concur. The House concurred with the Senate by a vote of
258-169, thus the bill was sent to President Biden and it ultimately
became law. [House Vote 513,
12/8/22; Congressional
Quarterly, 12/8/22;
Congressional Actions, S.Amdt.
6487;
Congressional Actions, H.R.
8404]
In Order To Gain Republican Support In The Senate, Senator
Baldwin (D) Led A Compromise Substitute Amendment That Included
Narrower Provisions On Same-Sex Marriage And Protections For The
Nonprofit Status Of Religious Organizations. According to
Congressional Quarterly, "But Republicans in the narrowly divided
Senate called the House bill a nonstarter, and negotiations led by
Baldwin hammered out a compromise. The substitute bill included
narrower provisions on same-sex marriage and included language to
protect religious organizations' nonprofit status." [Congressional
Quarterly, 11/29/22]
The Amended Bill Preserved Existing Religious Liberty Protections
And Preserved The Tax-Exempt Status Of Religious Institutions,
Regardless On Their Beliefs Regarding Same-Sex Marriage. According
to Congressional Quarterly, "The compromise religious liberty
language would leave intact existing religious freedom protections
in federal law and guarantee religious institutions tax-exempt
treatment regardless of their stance on same-sex marriage."
[Congressional Quarterly,
11/16/22]