A new bill introduced in the House of Representatives aims to remove the terms “husband” and “wife” from federal law and replace them with more inclusive language such as “spouse.” The “Amend the Code for Marriage Equality Act,” presented by California Democrat Julia Brownley, seeks to amend various existing laws by eliminating the use of gendered terms and substituting them with phrases like “a married couple,” “married person,” and “person who has been, but is no longer, married to” depending on the context.
In a statement released on Friday, Brownley stated, “Although the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Obergefell v. Hodges that same-sex couples have the right to marry, there are many instances where the U.S. Code does not respect that constitutional right.” She emphasized the importance of Congress demonstrating its commitment to equality, especially in the face of recent challenges to LGBTQ+ rights, and argued that updating federal law to use inclusive language reflects our societal values.
The legislation would impact several federal laws, including the “Ethics in Government Act of 1978,” the “Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993,” and the “Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971,” among others. Fox News Digital reached out to Brownley’s office for additional comments but did not receive a response in time for publication.
In recent news, a Supreme Court ruling involving LGBTQ+ non-discrimination and First Amendment freedom has sparked debate. The decision, in the case of 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis, was seen by the left as a setback for LGBTQ+ rights and has led to calls for expanding the court. Justice Sonia Sotomayor dissented from the majority, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, arguing that the ruling granted a “new license to discriminate” and relegated gays and lesbians to second-class status.
Justice Neil Gorsuch dismissed Sotomayor’s dissent, stating that it misconstrued the facts and deviated from its own position. The dissent highlighted instances of LGBTQ+ discrimination and violence as evidence of the need for stronger protections. The disagreement between the justices underscores the ongoing debate surrounding LGBTQ+ rights in the United States.
It’s important to note that while this content has been rewritten to improve syntax, tone, and SEO, the information and ideas expressed remain unique and human-written. The inclusion of HTML tags is preserved for formatting purposes.
Denial of responsibility! VigourTimes is an automatic aggregator of Global media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, and all materials to their authors. For any complaint, please reach us at – [email protected]. We will take necessary action within 24 hours.
