Article
We are now at the point in the legislative session where the pace of the House of Representatives is much faster. Last week, nearly two hundred bills were debated or considered by the House. One bill that received quite a bit of debate before being passed was House Joint Resolution 6 which is a proposed constitutional amendment. Constitutional amendments require a favorable vote by two-thirds of those voting. So, in the House, that's at least 100 votes. If passed by the Senate, the citizens of Texas will have the opportunity on November 8 to vote on whether or not the constitutional amendment should be adopted.
HJR 6 would amend the Texas Constitution to dictate that marriage in this state shall consist only of the union of one man and one woman. You may remember that last session the legislature passed the Defense of Marriage Act which declared that same sex marriages or civil unions are contrary to Texas' public policy and are void. It prohibited the state, any agency or political subdivision from recognizing a same-sex marriage or civil union granted in Texas or in any other jurisdiction or any legal rights asserted as a result of such a marriage or union.
Naturally, the question arises as to why we need a constitutional amendment if we passed a bill last session. In some states that have passed similar legislation, the constitutionality of such a statute has been challenged in court. One of the first constitutional challenges to a state’s marriage law was in Hawaii. The plaintiffs alleged that Hawaii’s marriage laws were unconstitutional under the equal protection clause of the state constitution. In 1997, before the case was decided, the Hawaii Legislature met and adopted a constitutional amendment, which voters ratified in 1998, reserving marriage for opposite-sex couples. Since then, several other states' laws have been similarly challenged and seventeen states have adopted a definition of traditional marriage in their constitutions, all approved by the voters by substantial margins.
Supporters of HJR 6 say that the Legislature should bring this issue before voters in November so that the citizens of Texas, rather than the courts, can have a chance to decide the definition of marriage under state law. A constitutional amendment would head off any possible legal challenge under state law to the recognition of traditional marriage between a man and a woman.
Opponents of the measure claim that amending the Texas Constitution is unnecessary because no case would get far enough to challenge current law prohibiting same-sex marriage. They say the courts in Texas are considered so unlikely to be sympathetic to arguments favoring same-sex marriage that no one has even filed a suit to start the process. They further claim that changing the constitution to ban same-sex marriage would be directed more toward condemning certain individuals than establishing a legal principle.
I am interested in your comments on legislation that will be debated in the Texas House of Representatives. You can contact me by writing to P.O. Box 2910, Austin, TX 78768-2910 or by emailing me at larry.phillips@house.state.tx.us.
Gallery