Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Marriage Equality topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Representative introduces constitutional amendment to repeal Montana’s same-sex marriage ban; supporters urge vote of the people
Summary
Representative Zoey Zephyr introduced House Bill 798, a proposed constitutional amendment to repeal the state constitutional ban on same-sex marriage. Dozens of proponents testified about family stability and legal protections; opponents urged preservation of traditional marriage and cited studies they said show different child outcomes.
Representative Zoey Zephyr opened a House Judiciary Committee hearing on House Bill 798, a proposed constitutional amendment to repeal the state constitutional ban on same-sex marriage and send the question to Montana voters.
Zephyr framed the amendment as a long-overdue cleanup of the constitution and a recognition of marriages that federal and state courts already treat as lawful. “It is the university itself and the surrounding areas,” Zephyr said by way of introducing herself; she recounted her own recent marriage and said the ban is “a relic of a crueler time.”
The hearing drew extensive proponent testimony. Witnesses described family and legal harms encountered when state law did not recognize same-sex marriages, and proponents emphasized equality, dignity and legal protections such as hospital visitation, parental recognition and estate rights. Several said the change is largely symbolic code cleanup because federal law and court rulings have already established marriage equality in practice; proponents asked the legislature to let Montana voters decide on a clean state constitutional text.
Organizations and individuals testifying in favor included the ACLU of Montana, the Montana Gender Alliance, BridgerCare and many individual Montanans who described family experiences. Sam Momeyer said, “It is far past time for our laws to reflect that reality,” and the ACLU representative argued that cleaning state law prevents confusion and avoids future legal conflict.
Opponents included representatives of the Montana Family Foundation, who argued the state should preserve a definition of marriage that recognizes a husband and wife and cited social science they said shows different outcomes for children raised in same-sex households. Opponents framed the question as protecting what they called complementary parental roles.
Representative Zephyr closed by urging colleagues to send the measure to voters. No committee vote or further action appears in the transcript; the hearing record shows extensive public testimony on both sides.
Why this matters: Repealing a constitutional ban would put the question of formal constitutional language to Montana voters and remove anachronistic text from the state charter; proponents argued it aligns the constitution with current law and practice while opponents framed the change as an attack on traditional marriage.
