• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Oklahoma’s Marriage Amendment Struck Down By Federal Judge

    A federal judge declared yesterday that Oklahoma’s law defining marriage as being between a man and a woman was unconstitutional.

    “The Court holds that Oklahoma’s constitutional amendment limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution,” wrote U.S. District Court Judge Terence Kern.

    “Yesterday’s decision from a federal district judge gets marriage and the Constitution wrong, and, if upheld on appeal, would force that state to act contrary to the meaning and purpose of marriage,” responds Ryan T.  Anderson, William E. Simon Fellow at The Heritage Foundation.  “The U.S. Constitution does not require redefining marriage.”

    “Whatever one thinks about marriage, the courts shouldn’t be redefining it,” Anderson adds. “Americans should make marriage policy through the democratic process rather than allowing judges to dictate it to them through decisions that have no grounding in our Constitution.”

    Anderson cited the Supreme Court’s decision last year on the federal Defense of Marriage Act, when the Court wrote that “the significance of state responsibilities for the definition and regulation of marriage dates to the Nation’s beginning; for ‘when the Constitution was adopted the common understanding was that the domestic relations of husband and wife and parent and child were matters reserved to the States.”

    “The states remain free—and should continue to remain free—to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman,” he says.

    Kern described Oklahoma’s marriage law, which defines marriage as being between a man and a woman, as “an arbitrary, irrational exclusion of just one class of Oklahoma citizens from a government benefit.” Anderson testified earlier this week before the Indiana House Judiciary Committee that the government’s rational basis for laws defining marriage as between a man and a woman was the need for children to have both a mother and a father.

    Posted in Culture, Front Page [slideshow_deploy]

    Comments are closed.

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.

    ×