The Supreme Court is hearing oral arguments today on question on whether the Constitution requires the redefinition of marriage to include two members of the same sex, and Congressman Palmer provides the following remarks:
"I believe that marriage is correctly defined as being between one man and one woman. This definition is rooted both in sacred truths and in history. I believe the Supreme Court wrongly decided the Windsor case holding that the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) was unconstitutional.
"However, in Windsor, the Court correctly noted that the definition of marriage was an area traditionally left to the states. The overwhelming majority of Alabamians agree with me that marriage is between one man and one woman. We enshrined this truth in our State Constitution by more than a 4-1 margin in 2006.
"Now, the Supreme Court is being asked to invalidate all state laws that have a politically incorrect definition of marriage. If the Court strikes down as unconstitutional laws it specifically hailed as sacrosanct less than two years ago, we would see the height of judicial overreach. It would be legislating from the bench. The Supreme Court should honor its own precedent and respect the will of the people in the states which hold a traditional view of marriage."
Congressman Palmer is a co-sponsor of H.R. 824, the State Defense of Marriage Act, which will require all administrative agencies to respect the role of states by using the definition of marriage where the individual lives with regard to all federal laws that involve marriage. States can still choose to define marriage as they wish.