Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Marriage Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Utah House Approves Measure Defining Marriage as Between a Man and a Woman
Summary
The Utah House passed First Substitute Senate Bill 24, redefining marriage in state policy as 'between a man and a woman,' after floor debate and the failure of an amendment to further specify 'one man and one woman.' The bill passed 62–12 and will return to the Senate.
The Utah House on the floor passed First Substitute Senate Bill 24, a measure stating that the policy of the state is to 'recognize as a marriage only the union between a man and a woman.' The bill passed the House 62 yes to 12 no and will be signed by the Speaker and returned to the Senate for further action.
Representative Dayton, sponsor of the bill, told members the legislation 'merely restates the historical reality' and argued the proposal was constitutional and necessary to protect the traditional family. Dayton read two paragraphs he said were published by Governor Mitt Romney and urged members to support the bill.
Opponents framed the bill as discriminatory and harmful to families headed by same‑sex couples. Representative Biskupski, speaking during debate, said, 'Gay and lesbian people are in every community in this state' and warned that 'defining marriage to exclude same‑sex couples creates a second class population of Utah citizens.' Representative Moss called the measure 'mean spirited' and 'bigoted,' and Representative McGee said the bill was 'a solution without a problem' and called it redundant with prior state law.
Representative Hansen offered Amendment No. 3 to change the bill's wording to define marriage as '1 man and 1 woman,' saying the change would prevent plural marriages and administrative anomalies at county clerks' offices. The amendment was put to a roll call and failed, 17 yes to 54 no.
Supporters, including Representative Christiansen and Representative Bigelow, argued that a clear statutory definition would prevent future redefinition and protect the family unit. Christiansen cited constitutional precedent and cases he said supported legislatures’ role in defining marriage; Bigelow warned that inconsistency would encourage subsequent efforts to change the definition.
Representative Dayton closed for the sponsor by citing the federal Defense of Marriage Act and noting that dozens of states had enacted similar measures; he urged final passage. After a motion to end debate passed, the House voted on the bill and recorded 62 yes votes and 12 no votes.
The House's action returns the measure to the Senate. The bill's immediate effect is a reaffirmation of state policy on marriage in Utah statutes; any broader legal challenges or federal interactions were not resolved on the floor and would depend on subsequent legislative or judicial action.
