Conservative Politicians Still Fighting Marriage Equality: Tennessee Rep. Womick Considers Legislation
The Supreme Court ruling on marriage equality may seem like old news and settled law, but for some politicians, it’s still a battle to be fought. In Tennessee, at least one State Representative is still bringing up an idea some states have already considered and discarded: eliminating marriage licenses altogether.
Some marriage equality supporters say they’re fine with the idea. It wouldn’t actually eliminate marriage, only government involvement in actually approving the union. Most proposals to this effect wouldn’t even affect couples filing taxes as married, or enjoying other benefits of legally recognized marriage.
To boil it down, while most people think of the process of marriage as one of picking rings, finding a minister, choosing flowers, and inviting loved ones, the legal aspect of the process is a bit different.
Legally speaking, there are four basic steps to marriage:
- Apply for and receive a license — essentially, assure your state government you can legally wed and get their stamp of approval.
- Ceremony and vows.
- Officiant signs off, confirming that the marriage is official.
- Marriage certificate is filed.
Marriage eligibility still varies somewhat from state to state, with some allowing marriage at younger ages than others, some requiring blood tests before a marriage license will be issued, and some having fewer restrictions on marriage between family members, but the above covers the general legal basics.
In response to the Supreme Court’s ruling on marriage equality, a few states’ legislators discussed simply eliminating the first step. NewsOK reports that such a bill passed the Oklahoma House in March — before the Supreme Court even ruled. The bill did not pass the state’s Senate, though. Talking Points Memo notes that Mississippi discussed similar legislation this summer, but it didn’t go far, either.
If such a bill did pass, it wouldn’t actually eliminate government involvement in marriage, only the pre-approval portion. Marriage certificates would still have to be signed by a licensed officiant, and filed with the state, and would still not be considered valid if the couple couldn’t legally wed (such as if one party was an underaged child, or already married).
Tennessee Representative Rick Womick spoke vocally about marriage equality at the time of the ruling. He issued a statement, reproduced in part below, calling for County Clerks in his state to refuse marriage licenses to same-sex couples, and urging others to do the same. The full statement is here.
“You did not take an oath to uphold an ‘opinion’ from five justices of the SCOTUS. Therefore, I am asking that each of you ignore the recent SCOTUS opinion redefining marriage, uphold our State Constitution, and issue marriage certificates to one man and one woman only.”
He later spoke in defense of Kim Davis, the County Clerk in Kentucky who did as Womick suggested and quit issuing marriage licenses, though she refused to issue them to any couple.
In this statement, Womick reiterated the belabored point that the Supreme Court cannot pass laws — a point that is true but irrelevant, since the court did not claim to pass any law, only to overturn certain laws that it ruled unconstitutional, which happens to be exactly the function of the Supreme Court.
“That would take the state out of the marriage business altogether.”
Despite this summer’s ruling at the highest court in the nation, it appears marriage equality is still a matter for debate in Tennessee.
[Photo by Mark Wilson/Getty Images]
