Michigan House Bill HR0028

Michigan 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/25/25
• Refer: 2/25/25

Caption

A resolution to condemn the Supreme Court of the United States’ decision in Obergefell v Hodges.

Impact

The resolution aims to reaffirm the traditional definition of marriage as a union between one man and one woman as described in the Michigan Constitution, directly opposing the Obergefell ruling. It highlights concerns that this decision diminishes the role of state governments in regulating marriage, undermining their authority to reflect the wishes of their citizens. By publicly denouncing the Supreme Court's ruling, this resolution seeks to protect what proponents perceive as a fundamental aspect of societal structure based on historical and cultural norms surrounding marriage.

Summary

House Resolution No. 28 condemns the Supreme Court's decision in Obergefell v. Hodges, which effectively legalized same-sex marriage across the United States. The resolution asserts that the ruling contradicts the Constitution and foundational principles of the United States. Proponents argue that the concept of liberty, as defined by the Framers of the Constitution, does not support the notion that the government should confer dignity or rights tied to marriage. They emphasize that marriage should remain within the purview of individual states, allowing them to govern marriage based on their respective constitutions and the will of the people.

Contention

Debate surrounding this resolution is likely to be contentious, drawing sharp lines between supporters who advocate for traditional marriage definitions and opponents who argue for equal rights for all individuals, including those in same-sex relationships. Critics of the resolution may view it as an attempt to enshrine discrimination against LGBTQ+ individuals and as a retrogressive step politically and socially. The text of the resolution presents an ideological conflict, suggesting that the affirmation of traditional marriage threatens religious liberty and undermines personal freedoms in the broader context of American democracy.