North Dakota legislators are nearing a historic decision that could position the state as the first to formally request the U.S. Supreme Court revisit and potentially overturn its 2015 decision that nationally legalized same-sex marriage. However, the resolution, already passed by the Republican-majority House in February, is pending approval from the Senate, where its future remains uncertain.
Republican Representative Bill Tveit, who sponsored the resolution, asserted that the 2015 Supreme Court ruling was in contradiction to both the Tenth Amendment and various North Dakota constitutional laws. “The oath to defend the Constitution is why this resolution was put forth,” Tveit declared.
Yet, not everyone in North Dakota supports this initiative. Laura Balliet, an attorney, and member of the North Dakota National Guard, expressed that such legislative actions make her feel unaccepted in her home state. Having married her wife in 2020, Balliet fervently shared her concerns during the Senate hearing, emphasizing her desire to feel welcomed in the state she considers home.
The resolution is not isolated to North Dakota. Massachusetts-based organization MassResistance, known for its controversial stances on LGBTQ+ issues, is reportedly advocating for similar resolutions in several states. Nonetheless, apart from North Dakota and Idaho, the measures have not gained significant traction.
In contrast, the legal landscape for same-sex marriage has progressively expanded with additional protections. Noteworthy advancements include a pivotal federal law established in 2022, alongside states like California and Colorado repealing outdated constitutional amendments that defined marriage exclusively as a union between a man and a woman.
The North Dakota resolution articulates a rejection of the 2015 Supreme Court decision, Obergefell v. Hodges, urging the court to redefine marriage strictly as a union between a “biological male” and a “biological female.” Justice Clarence Thomas, in a 2022 court ruling, indicated that past precedents concerning marriage might warrant reconsideration.
Despite its passage in the House, some Republican legislators have since reconsidered their support. Rep. Matt Ruby, for instance, expressed regret over his vote, believing the resolution projected a negative message about marriage equality. Rep. Dwight Kiefert, aligning his vote with his biblical beliefs, maintained the stance that marriage should reflect its biblical roots.
Democratic Senator Ryan Braunberger, who is openly gay and a member of the Senate panel reviewing the resolution, criticized the measure, highlighting its potential negative impact as North Dakota seeks economic and demographic growth. Cody Schuler from the North Dakota chapter of the ACLU warned that defining marriage through a predominantly religious perspective might infringe upon constitutional principles.
