Editing Federal Marriage Amendment (section)

==Legislative history==
The Federal Marriage Amendment has been introduced in the [[United States Congress]] multiple different times: in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2008, 2013, and 2015; none of which were successful.

===2002===
[[File:Ronnie Shows bioguide.jpg|180px|thumb|[[Ronnie Shows]], sponsor of the first Federal Marriage Amendment]]
The original proposed Federal Marriage Amendment was written by the [[Alliance for Marriage]] under [[Matthew Daniels]] with the assistance of former [[Solicitor General of the United States|Solicitor General]] and failed [[Supreme Court of the United States|Supreme Court]] nominee Judge [[Robert Bork]], Professor [[Robert P. George]] of [[Princeton University]], and Professor Gerard V. Bradley of [[Notre Dame Law School]].<ref>Cooperman, Alan. (February 14, 2004) [https://web.archive.org/web/20110629015242/http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A40866-2004Feb13 "Little Consensus on Marriage Amendment: Even Authors Disagree on the Meaning of Its Text"] ''[[The Washington Post]]''. Retrieved August 18, 2007.</ref><ref name="WSJ2004">{{cite news |last1=SchlesingerStaff |first1=Jacob M. |title=How Gay Marriage Thrust 2 Outsiders Onto Center Stage |url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB107749245871536123 |access-date=3 March 2022 |work=The Wall Street Journal |date=24 February 2004}}</ref> It was introduced in the [[107th United States Congress]] in the [[United States House of Representatives|House of Representatives]] on May 15, 2002, by Representative [[Ronnie Shows]] ([[Democratic Party (United States)|D]]-[[Mississippi|Miss.]]) with 22 cosponsors,<ref>{{cite news|title=Marriage Amendment Preserves Male-Female Union|url=http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,52891,00.html|access-date=October 7, 2012|newspaper=Fox News|date=May 16, 2002}}</ref> and read:

{{blockquote|Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman. Neither this Constitution or the constitution of any State, nor state or federal law, shall be construed to require that marital status or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon unmarried couples or groups.}}

The bill was designated H.J.Res 93 and was immediately referred to the [[United States House Committee on the Judiciary|House Committee on the Judiciary]]. On July 18, 2002, it was referred to the Subcommittee on the Constitution, which took no action on it.<ref>Shows, Ronnie, et al. (May 15, 2002) [https://web.archive.org/web/20150426211324/http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d107:h.j.res.00093 H.J.RES.93 Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relating to marriage] [[United States House of Representatives]], [[Library of Congress]]. Retrieved July 1, 2013.</ref>

===2003===
The amendment was introduced again by Rep. [[Marilyn Musgrave]] ([[Republican Party (United States)|R]]-[[Colorado|Colo.]]) on May 21, 2003, with the same wording proposed in 2002.<ref name=hjres56>Musgrave, Marilyn, et al. (May 21, 2003) [http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:h.j.res.00056: H.J.RES.56 Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relating to marriage]{{Dead link|date=August 2021 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }} [[United States House of Representatives]], [[Library of Congress]]. Retrieved August 19, 2007.</ref><ref name=sjres26>Wayne, Allard, et al. (November 25, 2003) [http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:SJ00026: S.J.RES.26 Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relating to marriage]{{Dead link|date=August 2021 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }} [[United States House of Representatives]], [[Library of Congress]]. Retrieved August 19, 2007.</ref> The bill was designated H.J.Res.56 in the House and was immediately referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary. On June 25, 2003, it was referred to the Subcommittee on the Constitution, where hearings were held on May 13, 2004.<ref name=hjres56/> On November 23, Rep. [[Barney Frank]] (D-[[Massachusetts|Mass.]]) objected that the amendment would interrupt Massachusetts' scheduled experiment with same-sex marriage, then scheduled to begin in May 2004. Musgrave countered that the Massachusetts marriages were court-ordered. She said: "If we're going to redefine marriage, let's let the American people, through their elected representatives, decide—not activist judges. Let the people of Massachusetts decide."<ref>{{cite news|last=Savage|first=Charlie|title=Frank sees referendum for ruling on gay marriage |url=http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2003/11/24/frank_sees_referendum_for_ruling_on_gay_marriage/ |access-date=August 19, 2013|newspaper=Boston Globe|date=November 24, 2003}}</ref>

The bill was introduced in the Senate by Senator [[Wayne Allard]] ([[Republican Party (United States)|R]]-[[Colorado|Colo.]]) on November 25, 2003, and designated S.J.Res.26. The amendment changed the language of the proposed amendment, substituting "marriage" for "marital status" and specifying that it applied to "any union other than the union of a man and a woman" rather than "unmarried couples or groups". The changes were intended to make it clear that state legislatures could still recognize civil unions if the amendment were to pass. "This new language makes the intent of the legislation even clearer: to protect marriage in this country as the union between a man and a woman, and to reinforce the authority of state legislatures to determine benefits issues related to civil unions or domestic partnerships," said Sen. Wayne Allard.<ref>{{cite news|title=Federal Marriage Amendment Reworded to Allow Civil Unions|url=http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2004/marchweb-only/3-22-22.0.html|access-date=August 3, 2013|newspaper=Christianity Today|date=March 1, 2004}}</ref> It was immediately referred to the [[United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary|Senate Committee on the Judiciary]].<ref name=sjres26/>

===2004===
When the 2003 version of the FMA failed to advance in the Congress, Senator Allard re-introduced the Amendment on May 22, 2004, with a revised second sentence. Rep. Musgrave re-introduced the Amendment in the House on September 23, 2004, with the same revision.

The 2004 version of the Federal Marriage Amendment stated:<ref name=hjres106>Musgrave, Marilyn, et al. (September 23, 2004) [http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:h.j.res.00106: H.J.RES.106 Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relating to marriage] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081112151742/http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:h.j.res.00106: |date=November 12, 2008 }} [[United States House of Representatives]], [[Library of Congress]]. Accessed August 18, 2007.</ref><ref name=sjres30>Allard, Wayne, et al. (March 22, 2004) [http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:SJ00030: S.J.RES.30 Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relating to marriage] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160704170158/http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:SJ00030: |date=July 4, 2016 }} [[United States Senate]], [[Library of Congress]]. Accessed August 18, 2007.</ref><ref name=sjres40>Allard, Wayne, et al. (July 7, 2004) [http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:SJ00040: S.J.RES.40 Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relating to marriage] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081112024019/http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:SJ00040: |date=November 12, 2008 }} [[United States Senate]], [[Library of Congress]]. Accessed September 1, 2007.</ref>

{{blockquote|Marriage in the United States shall consist solely of the union of a man and a woman. Neither this Constitution nor the constitution of any State shall be construed to require that marriage or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon any union other than the union of a man and a woman.}}

The bill was designated S.J.Res.30 in the Senate and was immediately referred to the Senate Committee on the Judiciary. When the bill became stuck in committee, Senator Allard re-introduced the Amendment in the Senate on July 7, 2004, where it was designated S.J.Res.40. The bill was subject to a [[Filibuster (legislative tactic)|filibuster]]: on July 9, 12, 13 and 14, the motion was made to proceed to consideration of the measure. On July 14, 2004, a [[cloture]] motion to force a direct vote on the FMA was defeated in the Senate by a margin of 50 nay votes to 48 yea votes. The 48 votes in support of the cloture motion were 12 votes short of the 60-vote [[supermajority]] (three-fifths) needed to end debate and force a vote on the Amendment itself.<ref name=sjres40/> Senators [[John Kerry]] of [[Massachusetts]] and [[John Edwards]] of [[North Carolina]] skipped the filibuster vote.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/15/us/senators-block-initiative-to-ban-same-sex-unions.html?scp=4&sq=&pagewanted=all|title=Senators Block Initiative to Ban Same-Sex Unions|last=Hulse|first=Carl|date=July 15, 2004|work=The New York Times|access-date=June 16, 2009}}</ref> On July 15, 2004, the motion to proceed to consideration of the Amendment was withdrawn in the Senate.<ref name=sjres40/> Six Republicans voted with a majority of Democrats against cloture in the Senate.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/14/politics/senate-vote-blocks-effort-to-ban-gay-marriage-in-constitution.html|title=Senate Vote Blocks Effort to Ban Gay Marriage in Constitution|last=Hulse|first=Carl|date=2004-07-14|work=The New York Times|access-date=2018-05-29|language=en-US|issn=0362-4331}}</ref>

The bill was designated H.J.Res.106 in the House and was immediately referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary. On September 28, 2004, rules were recommended by the [[United States House Committee on Rules|House Rules Committee]] with regards to debate and voting on the proposed Amendment. The rules were passed on September 30.<ref name=hjres106/><ref name=hres801>(September 28, 2004) [http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:H.RES.801: H.RES.801 Providing for consideration of the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 106)] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141009060825/http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:H.RES.801: |date=October 9, 2014 }} [[United States House Committee on Rules|House Rules Committee]]. [[United States House of Representatives]]. Retrieved September 1, 2007.</ref> The resolution was immediately considered. Passage of the proposed Amendment failed 227 yea votes to 186 nay votes, where 290 yea votes (two-thirds) are required for passage of a proposed [[Article Five of the United States Constitution|Constitutional amendment]].<ref name=hjres106/>

===2005/2006===
On January 24, 2005, Senator Allard introduced the Marriage Protection Amendment, which was the 2004 version of the Federal Marriage Amendment verbatim, with 21 Republican co-sponsors. In 2006, Rep. Musgrave introduced the Marriage Protection Amendment in the House. This version had the same language as the 2004 proposal, except that the word "solely" in the first sentence was replaced by the word "only".<ref name=hjres88>Musgrave, Marilyn, et al. (June 6, 2006) [http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:h.j.res.00088: H.J.RES.88 Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relating to marriage] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081111213948/http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:h.j.res.00088: |date=November 11, 2008 }} [[United States House of Representatives]], [[Library of Congress]]. Retrieved August 19, 2007.</ref><ref name=sjres1>Allard, Wayne, et al. (January 24, 2005) [http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:SJ00001: S.J.RES.1 Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relating to marriage] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081112032657/http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:SJ00001: |date=November 12, 2008 }} [[United States Senate]], [[Library of Congress]]. Retrieved August 19, 2007.</ref>

The bill was designated S.J.Res.1 in the Senate and was immediately referred to the Senate Committee on the Judiciary. On November 9, 2005, the [[United States Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Property Rights|Subcommittee on Constitution, Civil Rights and Property Rights]] approved the bill for consideration by the full Judiciary Committee. On May 18, 2006, the Judiciary Committee reported to the Senate and the bill was placed on the legislative calendar. The motion to proceed to the measure was first made on June 5, 2006. A cloture motion on the motion to proceed was then presented in Senate. On June 6 and 7, the motion to proceed to the measure was again considered in the Senate. On June 7, a [[cloture]] motion to force a direct vote on the Marriage Protection Amendment was defeated in the Senate by a margin of 48 nay votes to 49 yea votes, with the vote mostly following party lines with Democrats opposing and Republicans in favor.<ref name=sjres1/><ref name="2006Cloture">(June 7, 2006) [https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=2&vote=00163 U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 109th Congress - 2nd Session - Motion to Invoke Cloture on the Motion to Proceed to the Consideration of S. J. Res. 1] Clerk of the [[United States Senate]]. Retrieved August 18, 2007.</ref> The 49 votes in support of the cloture motion were 11 votes short of the 60-vote [[supermajority]] (three-fifths) needed to end debate and force a vote on the Amendment itself.<ref name=sjres1/> Eight Republican Senators opposed or did not vote; four Democratic Senators favored or did not vote.<ref name="2006Cloture"/><ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna13181735|title=Gay marriage ban defeated in Senate vote|date=2006-06-07|work=msnbc.com|access-date=2018-05-29|language=en}}</ref>  The only Senators who changed their position from the 2004 vote to the 2006 vote were Senators [[Judd Gregg]] (R-[[New Hampshire|N.H.]]) and [[Arlen Specter]] (R-[[Pennsylvania|Penn.]]), both of whom voted Yea in 2004 and Nay in 2006.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/07/AR2006060700929_pf.html|title=Gay Marriage Ban Falls Short of Majority|last=Kellman|first=Laurie|date=June 7, 2006|newspaper=The Washington Post|agency=Associated Press|access-date=July 7, 2009}}</ref>

The bill was designated H.J.Res.88 in the House and was immediately referred to the [[United States House Committee on the Judiciary|House Committee on the Judiciary]]. On July 17, 2006, rules were recommended by the [[United States House Committee on Rules|House Rules Committee]] with regards to debate and voting on the proposed Amendment. The rules were passed on July 18.<ref name=hjres88/><ref name=hres918>(July 18, 2006) [http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:H.RES.918: H.RES.918 Providing for consideration of the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 88)] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140925205438/http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:H.RES.918: |date=September 25, 2014 }} [[United States House Committee on Rules|House Rules Committee]]. [[United States House of Representatives]]. Retrieved September 1, 2007.</ref> The resolution was immediately considered. Passage of the proposed Amendment failed 236 yea votes to 187 nay votes, where 290 yea votes (two-thirds) are required for passage. The motion to reconsider was immediately [[Table (verb)|laid on the table]] and agreed to without objection.<ref name=hjres88/> Twenty-seven Republican Representatives opposed the FMA; thirty-four Democrats voted in favor of the FMA and one Independent voted against the FMA in the vote on July 18, 2006, in the House.<ref>Clerk of the House. (July 18, 2007) [http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2006/roll378.xml Final Vote Results For Roll Call 378] [[U.S. House of Representatives]]. Retrieved August 22, 2007.</ref>

===2008===
On May 22, 2008, Rep. [[Paul Broun]] (R-Ga.) and 91 co-sponsors introduced H.J.Res.89, which proposed the enactment of FMA.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.opencongress.org/bill/110-hj89/show|title=H.J.Res.89: Marriage Protection Amendment|date=May 22, 2008|publisher=OpenCongress.org|access-date=July 7, 2009}}</ref> Senator [[Roger Wicker]] ([[Republican Party (United States)|R]]-[[Mississippi|Miss.]]) and eight other senators introduced similar legislation with S.J.Res.43 on June 25.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:S.J.RES.43:|title=S. J. RES. 43|publisher=Library of Congress|access-date=July 7, 2009|archive-date=November 27, 2008|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081127081642/http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:S.J.Res.43:|url-status=dead}}</ref>

===2013===
U.S. Representative [[Tim Huelskamp]] (R-[[Kansas]]) reintroduced the FMA ({{USBill|113|hjres|51}}) on June 28, 2013, in response to the U.S. Supreme Court decision striking down the [[Defense of Marriage Act]] in ''[[United States v. Windsor]]''.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/154997-huelskamp-defends-amendment-to-ban-gay-marriage/ |title=Huelskamp defends amendment to ban gay marriage |last=Jaffe |first=Alexandra |date=June 30, 2013 |newspaper=The Hill |access-date=July 17, 2013}}</ref> The bill, which had 58 cosponsors, never made it out of committee.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/house-joint-resolution/51|title=H.J.Res.51 - 113th Congress (2013-2014): Marriage Protection Amendment|date=July 15, 2013}}</ref>

===2015===
Huelskamp again introduced the Federal Marriage Amendment in 2015, during the [[114th Congress]], as {{USBill|114|hjres|32}}. The amendment garnered 37 cosponsors, all Republicans. It never made it out of committee.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-joint-resolution/32|title=H.J.Res.32 - 114th Congress (2015-2016): Marriage Protection Amendment|date=February 12, 2015}}</ref>