ELECTION 2025: Virginia delegates could decide the fate of same-sex marriage
A ‘THEY WON’T STOP AT ROE’ flag hangs off the porch of an Oregon Hill home. The Supreme Court of the United States overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022, removing the federal right to abortion. SCOTUS has been formally asked to revisit Obergefell v. Hodges, which grants the right to same-sex marriage. Photo by Andrew Kerley.
Sakina Kazmi, Contributing Writer
All 100 Virginia House of Delegates seats are up for election on Nov. 4. The elected members will vote on whether or not to amend the Virginia constitution to codify marriage rights in the Commonwealth as Supreme Court threats put federal protections in jeopardy.
Same-sex marriage is protected on the national level by the Supreme Court’s landmark decision over the 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges case. Over 10 years later, Kentucky county clerk Kim Davis — who once refused to issue a marriage license to a same-sex couple for religious reasons — petitioned in August for the high court to overturn the ruling.
Should the majority Republican-appointed court revisit the case and overturn it, Virginia would revert to a 2006 ban on same-sex marriage written into its constitution.
The Virginia General Assembly passed resolutions earlier this year to establish an affirmative right to marry regardless of sex, gender or race. To amend the constitution the body must pass the amendment a second time in 2026, after which it will be taken up by Virginians in a referendum the following November.
Two amendments are on the table: House Joint Resolution 9 would codify the right to marriage, while Senate Joint Resolution 249 would repeal the previous law that defines marriage as only between men and women.
Sen. Adam Ebbin, D-Alexandria, introduced SJ 249. He was the first openly LGBTQ+ person elected to the Virginia General Assembly as a delegate in 2003. In 2011, he became the first openly LGBTQ person elected to the Virginia Senate.
“It’s obvious that democrats are supportive of LGBT rights and Republicans are a threat,” Ebbin said.
SJ249 passed with a vote of 58-34 — the 34 votes not in favor were all from Republican delegates.
“Democrats are supportive of LGBT rights, and the Republicans are a threat,” Ebbin said.
Neither the Democratic or Republican candidates for the 78th district, which includes VCU, responded to requests for comment, but incumbent Del. Betsy Carr, D-Richmond, voted in favor of the amendments earlier this year.
While the decision will fall to the General Assembly, the gubernatorial candidates have also made their stances on the issue clear.
Democratic nominee and former congresswoman Abigail Spanberger’s campaign platform notes her belief that no Virginian should face discrimination based on race, ethnicity, religion, disability or who they love. She voted to pass legislation for legal protections for same-sex and interracial couples as a congressional representative for Virginia’s seventh district.
Last year, Republican candidate Winsome Earle-Sears included a handwritten note of personal objection to House Bill 174, a bill prohibiting officials from denying marriage licenses based on sex, gender or race. She wrote that she was “morally opposed” to the bill’s content, according to Virginia Scope.
Richmond maintains a perfect score of 100 in the 2023 Municipal Equality Index, which evaluates municipalities based on their inclusivity in laws, policies and services for the LGBTQ community.
Equality Virginia, an organization that advocates for the LGBTQ+ community, made a Facebook post on Aug. 13 bringing attention to Davis’ petition.
“There’s no reason for the Supreme Court to take this case and unsettle something that has been so good for children, families and the larger society,” the post stated.
The organization is encouraging Richmonders to vote in the upcoming election to elect a progressive majority in Virginia’s top political offices.
Third-year biomedical engineering student Isha Satapathy is the vice president of Queer Middle Eastern, North African and South Asian Students at VCU. She said legislative cases that support LGBTQ+ rights make their community feel secure.
“The fact that gay marriage was accepted in some semblance of legal structure was very reassuring for a long time, and now that it [may be] taken away, it is very stressful,” Satapathy said. “Every law and SCOTUS decision is a plug in a dam, to stop the dam from bursting and eradicating all of [people’s] rights.”
Virginians can participate in early voting until Nov. 1. Election day is on Nov. 4. Voting information, locations and hours are available at elections.virginia.gov.
I suspect the Supreme Court isn’t going to revisit Obergefell v. Hodges. You would have to prove that same-sex couples marrying harms anyone, and there is no evidence of that. Fact is, marriage equality for same-sex couples shouldn’t have taken as long as it did. There was never any constitutional justification for denying law-abiding, taxpaying Gay couples the same right to marry that Straight couples have always taken for granted. What more legal reasoning do you need?
Churches have never been forced to provide weddings for anyone, and it’s a moot point anyway, since the legal benefits of marriage don’t come from the church, they come from the federal government. Procreation and parenting are irrelevant also, since couples do not need to marry to make babies, nor is the ability or even desire to make babies a prerequisite for a marriage license.
According to the Government Accountability Office (GAO) there are 1,138 legal protections, regulations, and responsibilities that pertain specifically to married couples. Much of this has to do with Social Security, inheritance, healthcare, etc. If the government wanted to get out of the marriage business altogether, it would be a legal quagmire.
Some would also suggest that marriage should be left up to individual states, but the point would be moot since a marriage honored in one state is honored across state lines. Marriage is fundamentally a contractual agreement between two adults. Any couple can fly off to Las Vegas for the weekend, get married by an Elvis impersonator, and that marriage is automatically honored back home, thanks to the “Full Faith and Credit” clause.
Maybe I’m being overly optimistic, but I don’t think SCOTUS will reconsider the issue. Frankly, they wouldn’t DARE.