The White House concern about same-sex marriage stems from language in Section 8 of the Act: "An unlawful employment practice ... shall include [employment discrimination] ... that is conditioned, in a State in which a person cannot marry a person of the same sex, either on being married or being eligible to marry.H.R. 3685 is inconsistent with the right to the free exercise of religion as codified by Congress in the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA).... For instance, schools that are owned by or directed toward a particular religion are exempted by the bill; but those that emphasize religious principles broadly will find their religious liberties burdened by H.R. 3685.
A second concern is H.R. 3685’s authorization of Federal civil damage actions against State entities, which may violate States’ immunity under the Eleventh Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
The bill turns on imprecise and subjective terms that would make interpretation, compliance, and enforcement extremely difficult. For instance, the bill establishes liability for acting on "perceived" sexual orientation, or "association" with individuals of a particular sexual orientation.... Provisions of this bill purport to give Federal statutory significance to same-sex marriage rights under State law. These provisions conflict with the Defense of Marriage Act, which defines marriage as the legal union between one man and one woman. The Administration strongly opposes any attempt to weaken this law, which is vital to defending the sanctity of marriage.
Objective coverage of church-state and religious liberty developments, with extensive links to primary sources.
Wednesday, October 24, 2007
White House Threatens Veto of ENDA
Democratic leaders in the House of Representatives announced yesterday that they are postponing a vote on the Employment Non-Discrimination Act. (See prior posting.) The Washington Blade reports that differing reasons were given for the postponement. The announcement came several hours after the White House issued an interesting Statement of Administration Policy threatening a possible veto of ENDA: