In Bismarck, North Dakota legislators are close to urging the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn its landmark decision from a decade ago that legalized same-sex marriage across the country. North Dakota stands to be the first state to make such a formal request, even if the Supreme Court is not mandated to act upon it. Currently, the resolution has passed in the Republican-controlled House but still awaits a verdict from the Senate, where its passage is uncertain.
Republican Representative Bill Tveit, who sponsors the resolution, argues that the Supreme Court’s 2015 decision infringes on both the Tenth Amendment and the North Dakota Constitution. Tveit mentioned, “We all swore an oath to uphold the broader Constitution as well as our state’s laws, which is why I put this forward.”
Laura Balliet, a lawyer and North Dakota National Guard member, shared her personal concerns, expressing a sense of exclusion and judgment because of her identity. Married in 2020 to her wife, Balliet vocalized frustration, lamenting that this motion suggests individuals like her are not embraced in their own state, a sentiment echoed by opponents at a recent Senate hearing.
Nationally, Massachusetts-based MassResistance is reportedly advocating for similar resolutions in other states. MassResistance, identified by LGBTQ+ groups like GLAAD as an “anti-LGBTQ hate group,” aims to promote traditional marriage definitions. Though similar initiatives have cropped up in Idaho and North Dakota, with little headway elsewhere, states like California, Colorado, Hawaii, Nevada, and potentially Virginia are enacting newer laws honoring same-sex unions, complementing federal measures passed in 2022.
The contentious North Dakota proposal seeks a rebuke of the Obergefell v. Hodges decision from the Supreme Court, advocating a return to defining marriage exclusively as a heterosexual union. Influenced by a 2022 Supreme Court judgment influencing abortion rights, Justice Clarence Thomas hinted at revisiting previous decisions affecting marriage equality.
Close to the North Dakota House’s approval of the resolution, a handful of Republican lawmakers registered regret about their supportive votes. Representative Matt Ruby realized too late that his vote could convey a negative stance on the validity and acceptance of same-sex marriages, which he considers valid. Meanwhile, Representative Dwight Kiefert voiced his support for the resolution based on his Christian beliefs, asserting that marriage originated biblically between Adam and Eve.
Democratic Senator Ryan Braunberger, who is an openly gay member of the Senate panel discussing the resolution, criticized it as dismissive towards those in committed same-sex marriages. Braunberger warns this move could hinder North Dakota’s appeal as a diverse and inclusive place for potential newcomers.
Cody Schuler from the American Civil Liberties Union’s North Dakota chapter alerts that framing marriage as strictly a union between one man and one woman borders on religious imposition against the U.S. Constitution’s Establishment Clause. Schuler cautions that such statements from lawmakers may preview potential legal moves, despite the resolution’s nonbinding nature.