Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: Supreme Court formally asked to overturn landmark same-sex marriage ruling [View all]BumRushDaShow
(158,693 posts)73. It was actually codified into law in 2022
H.R.8404 - Respect for Marriage Act
That repealed DOMA and clarified -
That repealed DOMA and clarified -
Public Law No: 117-228 (12/13/2022)
Respect for Marriage Act
This act provides statutory authority for same-sex and interracial marriages.
Specifically, the act replaces provisions that define, for purposes of federal law, marriage as between a man and a woman and spouse as a person of the opposite sex with provisions that recognize any marriage between two individuals that is valid under state law. (The Supreme Court held that the current provisions were unconstitutional in United States v. Windsor in 2013.)
The act also replaces provisions that do not require states to recognize same-sex marriages from other states with provisions that prohibit the denial of full faith and credit or any right or claim relating to out-of-state marriages on the basis of sex, race, ethnicity, or national origin. (The Supreme Court held that state laws barring same-sex marriages were unconstitutional in Obergefell v. Hodges in 2015; the Court held that state laws barring interracial marriages were unconstitutional in Loving v. Virginia in 1967.) The act allows the Department of Justice to bring a civil action and establishes a private right of action for violations.
The act does not (1) affect religious liberties or conscience protections that are available under the Constitution or federal law, (2) require religious organizations to provide goods or services to formally recognize or celebrate a marriage, (3) affect any benefits or rights that do not arise from a marriage, or (4) recognize under federal law any marriage between more than two individuals.
Respect for Marriage Act
This act provides statutory authority for same-sex and interracial marriages.
Specifically, the act replaces provisions that define, for purposes of federal law, marriage as between a man and a woman and spouse as a person of the opposite sex with provisions that recognize any marriage between two individuals that is valid under state law. (The Supreme Court held that the current provisions were unconstitutional in United States v. Windsor in 2013.)
The act also replaces provisions that do not require states to recognize same-sex marriages from other states with provisions that prohibit the denial of full faith and credit or any right or claim relating to out-of-state marriages on the basis of sex, race, ethnicity, or national origin. (The Supreme Court held that state laws barring same-sex marriages were unconstitutional in Obergefell v. Hodges in 2015; the Court held that state laws barring interracial marriages were unconstitutional in Loving v. Virginia in 1967.) The act allows the Department of Justice to bring a civil action and establishes a private right of action for violations.
The act does not (1) affect religious liberties or conscience protections that are available under the Constitution or federal law, (2) require religious organizations to provide goods or services to formally recognize or celebrate a marriage, (3) affect any benefits or rights that do not arise from a marriage, or (4) recognize under federal law any marriage between more than two individuals.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
2 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
92 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations

Supreme Court formally asked to overturn landmark same-sex marriage ruling [View all]
BumRushDaShow
Aug 11
OP
you are right. we the people can NO longer the #USSC to be logical nor fair. I am fearful right now.
riversedge
Aug 11
#38
Title nine is next. They are just cutting their teeth on the transgender sports issue.
Walleye
Aug 11
#56
I totally disagree. Everyone thought the same thing about Roe v. Wade which had been the law of the land for
Texin
Aug 11
#37
Medicare has changed thousands of policies in the years it's been available...
Trueblue Texan
Aug 11
#31
Using the same argument, as an atheist, working as a postal clerk, I could refuse
Trueblue Texan
Aug 11
#28
Sorry. I had mixed it up with the ACA decision where Roberts was the deciding vote
Wiz Imp
Aug 11
#48
I'm not gay, but I left about the time you left and after my Mom and Dad died there was no one left for me to visit.
CTyankee
Aug 11
#66
It was a no brainer decision. Someone just had to get the right case in front of them
underpants
Aug 11
#15
If it LOOKS like Christian Nationalism, if it SOUNDS like Christian Nationalism,
70sEraVet
Aug 11
#20
re: "religion punishes questioning and rewards gullibility" -- sounds like MAGA is a religion.
thesquanderer
Aug 11
#57
In the marriage vows, there's a line that says something like..what god has joined together, let no one separate
Deuxcents
Aug 11
#54
The law was apparently written to address the 1st Amendment claims (religious objection)
BumRushDaShow
Aug 11
#82