Marriage Protection Act of 2004

MARRIAGE PROTECTION ACT OF 2004 -- (House of Representatives - July 22, 2004)

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 734, I call up the bill (H.R. 3313) to amend title 28, United States Code, to limit Federal court jurisdiction over questions under the Defense of Marriage Act, and ask for its immediate consideration.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. BUYER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 3313, the Marriage Protection Act, introduced by my good friend and fellow Hoosier Mr. HOSTETTLER.

In recent years, judicial activism has continued to attack the traditions that have defined this Nation-our pledge of allegiance declared unconstitutional-and now it seems that marriage is its next target.

In 1996, Congress passed the Defense of Marriage Act by a wide margin in this Chamber and in the other body. I cosponsored the Defense of Marrige Act. It was necessary to pass the Defense of Marrige Act to preserve the States their ability to decide for themselves how marriage is to be constituted within their respective borders. To remind this body of the definition of federalism seems elementary, but I fear that a lesson may be needed for those who do not support this legislation.

The Defense of Marrige Act provides that for Fedreal law, marrige shall mean the union of one man and one woman. It further provides that the States do not have to recognize alternative unions established in other States. Since that time, 44 States of our Union have passed laws that provide that marriage shall consist only of the union of one man and one woman. My State of Indiana has done so.

Now, traditional marriage is under attack and the ability of States to protect traditional marriage within their borders is threatened ..... threatened by the judicial branch.

The Marriage Protection Act, H.R. 3313, is a further step to insure that States maintain the ability to define marriage within their borders and that States are not forced, against the will of their citizens acting through their elected State legislatures, to accept the contortions of marriage legalized in other States. H.R. 3313 would prohibit the lower Federal courts and the Supreme Court from hearing cases that arise under the Defense of Marrige Act.

Congress has clear Constitutional authority to establish the jurisdiction of the lower Federal courts. In Article III, Congress is given the authority to establish the lower courts and to define the appellate jurisdiction under the regulation of Congress. This is part of the checks and balances that our Founding Fathers wove into the Constitution, to ensure that one branch does not exercise power beyond its bounds.

It is unfortunate that circumstances have arisen that have created the need for H.R. 3313. One State in the Nation has declared that "marriage" can be applied to relationships other than one man and one woman; and our fear is that the Federal courts will take the action of one State court and apply it to all 50 States. H.R. 3313 is insurance that the action of this State in expanding the definition of marriage does not have to be recognized in other States unless the people of that State agree to do so.

I commend the gentleman from Indiana's 8th district for introducing this legislation and I strongly urge its adoption.