The filings in Idaho, North Dakota, South Dakota, Michigan and Montana can’t compel the high court to reconsider its decision — and some of the resolutions may not even progress to a vote at the statehouse level, where bills representing fringe beliefs routinely die. But legal experts say their introduction signals that conservative state lawmakers are emboldened by the new Trump administration — and are testing the waters.
“It’s a way for people in conservative parts of the country, or conservative legislators, to say it’s a new era,” said Kimberly Mutcherson, professor of law at Rutgers Law School. “There is no heft to it. But it is a way of signaling to people that … these things are antithetical to the America that we want to live in.”
Support for same-sex marriage was at a record high when the justices issued the 5-4 Obergefell ruling, with over 60 percent of Americans in favor. Support has climbed since, nearing 70 percent as of last year.
But opposition to same-sex marriage has never entirely disappeared — most notably on the Supreme Court. In 2022, Justice Clarence Thomas suggested the court reconsider Obergefell in an opinion accompanying the court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, and with it the national right to abortion.
The resolutions introduced in each statehouse, first reported by the Idaho Statesman and Uncloseted Media, characterize Obergefell as a flawed interpretation of the Constitution, urging the Supreme Court to overturn the decision. MassResistance said on its website that “the ruling was a move by the activist SCOTUS justices at the time to take away the rights of the states on this contentious issue and simply imposed false marriage on the entire nation.”
The resolutions passed the Idaho and North Dakota houses; in Montana and South Dakota, the resolutions were recently killed in Senate and House committees, respectively, after lengthy debate. A lawmaker in the Michigan House introduced the resolution last week — immediately drawing ire from the state’s House Democrats, who blasted the effort in a news conference, and from Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (D). “Here’s my response to that: Hell no,” Whitmer said on X.
In North Dakota, where the resolution is headed to a vote in the Senate, testimony poured in during a committee hearing, with the majority forcefully opposing the measure.
Arthur Schaper, field director with MassResistance, provided lengthy testimony in North Dakota to support his organization’s model legislation. “Some may argue that this is a settled matter, that we have more pressing concerns. But if we allow the foundation of marriage and family to erode, then every other policy — economic, legal and cultural — rests on shifting sand,” he told the North Dakota House Judiciary Committee.
MassResistance declined a request for an interview. The group describes itself as a “pro-family activist organization.” The Southern Poverty Law Center has characterized it as an anti-LGBTQ+ hate group.
Brian Camenker founded the group in 1995 under the name Parents’ Rights Coalition, becoming MassResistance in 2006 with chapters in at least 17 states, according to the group’s website. The organization and its leaders have since pushed far-right issues nationwide, calling itself willing to “engage in issues and events that most other conservative groups are afraid to touch.”
Camenker has questioned whether a pregnant candidate was suitable for office, stating in 1998 that “the best thing for the baby is for the mother to stay home,” The Post reported at the time. In 2001, the group opposed a university scholarship created for gay and lesbian students whose families had cut them off, arguing that it infringed on parental rights.
In 2019, the group rallied against story times led by drag queens in public libraries, organizing boycotts, filing lawsuits and flooding public officials with calls and emails and likening the activity to child endangerment. More recently, MassResistance has provided model legislation across the nation to sever ties between local libraries and the American Library Association, NPR reported, part of a growing movement to restrict what kinds of books librarians can offer.
MassResistance’s challenges to same-sex marriage this legislative season come as President Donald Trump has attempted to roll back transgender people’s civil rights, touting in his address to Congress on Tuesday that he issued an executive order stating “that there are only two genders, male and female.”
Meanwhile, bills in Missouri, Oklahoma, Tennessee and Texas propose establishing a new category of “covenant marriage,” which is expressly for a man and woman. LGBTQ+ rights advocates argue the move is another tactic to undermine marriage equality.
“Attacking American institutions like marriage and spreading negativity about love is the work of a small, bitter minority,” said Sarah Kate Ellis, president and CEO of LGBTQ+ advocacy group GLAAD. “They’re completely out of step with the American people.”
Mutcherson, the Rutgers Law School professor, said that if the Supreme Court were to reconsider its marriage equality ruling, it would be a long road.
“There would have to be a constitutional case that got litigated,” she said. “There would have to be conflict among circuits that allow the case to wind up to the Supreme Court. That is the kind of thing that takes years.”
Ilya Somin, a professor of law at George Mason University, said extremist bills are common in state legislatures. “I would not worry too much about these bills unless and until at least one actually passes,” he said.
