Rep. Steve King (R-IA) conceded the fight against marriage equality in Iowa three years ago, but he isn’t yet done fighting it at the national level. He’s proposed a resolution he wants Congress to consider that would condem the Supreme Court’s ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges as an opinion that “unconstitutionally and indefensibly perverts the definition of marriage.”
In a statement accompanying the resolution on Friday, King claimed that “five unelected judges imposed their personal will on the States and the American people by overturning at least thirty states whose constitutions define marriage as a union between one man and one woman.” The resolution, which also describes the majority opinion as “a clear case of judicial activism,” would encourage states to defy the ruling and refuse to recognize same-sex couples’ marriages.
The resolution would assert that the House of Representatives “disagrees” with the opinion and that the following is true:
- the traditional definition of marriage is a union between one man and one woman
- the majority opinion in Obergefell unconstitutionally and indefensibly perverts the definition of marriage;
- the States may refuse to be bound by the holding in Obergefell;
- the States are not required to license same-sex marriage or recognize same-sex marriages performed in other States; and
- individuals, businesses, churches, religious groups, and other faith-based organizations are encouraged, empowered, and protected to exercise their faith without fear of legal or government interference.
King essentially wants Congress to encourage the entire country to discriminate against same-sex couples. This would be codified into law if lawmakers also considered the so-called “First Amendment Defense Act,” which would absolve anyone who refused to recognize a same-sex couple’s marriage from any consequences. According to Politico, “House Republican leaders have not indicated any desire to move legislation related to same-sex marriage.”
King has previously said that he doesn’t expect to see any gay people in Heaven, that he thinks of same-sex marriage as licenses for “friendships,” and that employment discrimination wouldn’t be an issue if LGBT people just hid their identities in the workplace.