ILNews

Same-sex marriage amendment passes Senate

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

The resolution seeking to ban same-sex marriage in the Indiana Constitution passed the Senate Monday, meaning the soonest voters may have a say in the matter is 2016.

Senators voted 32-17 to pass House Joint Resolution 3, the resolution that defines marriage as between one man and one woman. Initially, the resolution included another sentence: “A legal status identical or substantially similar to that of marriage for unmarried individuals shall not be valid or recognized.”

This sentence raised concerns for some regarding the potential impact on heterosexual couples and was taken out by the House of Representatives before moving the resolution to the Senate. Senators declined to put that sentence back in the amendment. Because the language in HJR3 approved by both houses differs from the language previously approved, this new version will need to be approved by the Indiana General Assembly in 2015 or 2016 before voters could get a chance to weigh in.

The decision to not reinsert the second sentence in HRJ3 led Sen. Mike Delph, R-Carmel, to call a press conference where he chastised Senate President Pro Tem David Long, R-Fort Wayne. Delp said he wanted the measure to go back to second reading, and he voted against approving HJR3 Monday. The press conference came after Delph took to Twitter last week where he responded to critics and called out certain churches for not supporting the resolution.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Frankly, it is tragic that you are even considering going to an expensive, unaccredited "law school." It is extremely difficult to get a job with a degree from a real school. If you are going to make the investment of time, money, and tears into law school, it should not be to a place that won't actually enable you to practice law when you graduate.

  2. As a lawyer who grew up in Fort Wayne (but went to a real law school), it is not that hard to find a mentor in the legal community without your school's assistance. One does not need to pay tens of thousands of dollars to go to an unaccredited legal diploma mill to get a mentor. Having a mentor means precisely nothing if you cannot get a job upon graduation, and considering that the legal job market is utterly terrible, these students from Indiana Tech are going to be adrift after graduation.

  3. 700,000 to 800,000 Americans are arrested for marijuana possession each year in the US. Do we need a new justice center if we decriminalize marijuana by having the City Council enact a $100 fine for marijuana possession and have the money go towards road repair?

  4. I am sorry to hear this.

  5. I tried a case in Judge Barker's court many years ago and I recall it vividly as a highlight of my career. I don't get in federal court very often but found myself back there again last Summer. We had both aged a bit but I must say she was just as I had remembered her. Authoritative, organized and yes, human ...with a good sense of humor. I also appreciated that even though we were dealing with difficult criminal cases, she treated my clients with dignity and understanding. My clients certainly respected her. Thanks for this nice article. Congratulations to Judge Barker for reaching another milestone in a remarkable career.

ADVERTISEMENT