Wedding bills

Democrats have proposed eliminating language that prohibits same-sex marriage, while Republicans have called for requiring all marriages, same-sex or not, to be performed only by clerics, not civil officials, such as judges.

The High Court heard arguments in April from Michigan and three other states after marriage supporters appealed a federal Appeals Court ruling that upheld prohibitions. At stake is the state’s constitutional ban on same-sex marriage, which voters approved by 59 percent in 2004. It is one of 13 states that prohibit it.

State Sen. Curtis Hertel Jr., D-East Lansing, has introduced legislation to modernize Michigan’s marriage laws. Under the legislation, Senate Bill 227 of 2015, the prohibition on same-sex marriage as well as gender specific language would be stricken from Michigan law. The legislation would also create a list of family members prohibited from marrying each other under the law.

Hertel’s legislation is tied to passage with Senate Bill 229 of 2015 introduced by Sen. Rebekkah Warren, D-Ann Arbor. It would recognize out-of-state same-sex marriages and strike the statutory prohibition on recognition of such marriages. The bill also replaces gender specific language with neutral language.

Grand Ledge Republican Sen. Rick Jones, chairman of the Judiciary Committee, said virtually all such changes would be unnecessary if the court rules that same-sex marriage is legal because “all of Michigan’s laws contrary to the ruling are null and void.”

He said there is one exception. Michigan is one of seven states that provide a set amount, usually one-third, of the husband’s property upon his death to the wife. This is called dower rights, which are secured in the Michigan Constitution. In Michigan a woman can execute that right to all the property obtained during a marriage if she is contesting the will or there is no will. This property also includes property that has been sold. The law, which has its roots in medieval feudalism, was intended to protect a woman after her husband’s death.

“It’s a very ancient and archaic law,” said Jones. He has asked a policy attorney about how a dower right would be decided in a same-sex marriage. The attorney, Jones relayed, said, “That’s a good question.”

“I have reached out to the state bar to work on this,” he said, noting Realtors originally raised the issue with him. “That would be something that should be addressed.” He has not introduced any legislation on the issue yet.

Republican lawmakers Reps. Cindy Gamrat, of Plainwell, and Todd Courser, of Lapeer, introduced a package of bills last week that would eliminate the ability of judges, mayors, county clerks and other civil servants to conduct marriages. Instead, it would leave such ceremonies exclusively in the hands of religious officials and organizations.

The bill goes further than legislation that has passed in North Carolina that public officials cannot be required to perform samesex marriage.

The Republicans’ package would also limit secret marriages — long legal in Michigan — to only opposite-sex couples. Marriage licenses and applications are public information in Michigan, unless otherwise approved by the county probate court.

Ingham County Clerk Barb Byrum, a Democrat, said she was concerned about the impact of excluding same-sex couples from secret marriage options.

“In Michigan, I can marry a couple on Monday and on Tuesday they can be fired for being gay,” she said. “This bill would expose my couples to discrimination.”

Courser claims, in a blog post on his website, the bills will remove government involvement in marriage.

“This bill simply put will end our elected official’s involvement in performing marriage ceremonies,” he wrote. “It is incredibly important that if the Supreme Court rules against traditional marriage that our elected officials are not forced to violate their conscience and be forced to perform gay marriages. Further note on another piece of legislation being drafted — I have asked for drafting of a bill to protect pastors from being forced to perform gay marriages as well.”

Legal experts said the proposals are unconstitutional on their face, while politicians at the Capitol believe the bills aren’t going anywhere.

“This type of rhetoric represents the new wave of discrimination tactics designed to divide people into classes,” said Gina Calcagno, of Michigan for Marriage. “The Courser bills represent state sanctioned discrimination and rewrites what religious freedom and equal protection under the law means. Equality and fairness are not principles that are decided on a case-by-case basis.”

This all plays out in a public arena where numerous polls show the majority of Michigan voters oppose religious objections bills and support LGBT equality. But the GOP majority in the state Legislature opposes legislation to address discrimination against the LGBT community and supports religious objections laws. A recent example was legislation passed by both houses and signed by Gov. Rick Snyder that permits faithbased adoption agencies to deny adoptions to same-sex couples.