By signing the Respect for Marriage Act into law, President Biden, alongside Congress, is finally closing the book on concerns about the future of same-sex marriage in America raised following the Supreme Court’s ruling in the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization case.

In his opinion in Dobbs, Justice Clarence Thomas suggested the court should reconsider earlier decisions on a number of other topics such as the right to obtain contraceptives, the right to engage in private sexual acts, and same-sex marriage.

Justice Thomas is often described as an originalist, a judicial philosophy that focuses on interpreting the constitution as its authors intended at the time it was written. Based on this philosophy, he said that the earlier decisions had erred by creating rights that the constitution’s authors never intended. 

These rights, in Justice Thomas’ view, stem from a misinterpretation of the 14th Amendment’s guarantee of “due process.” That provision assures Americans fair and equal treatment in legal proceedings, in his reasoning, but does not “secure any substantive rights.”

Though other justices attempted to assuage concerns about Justice Thomas’s call to reconsider such decisions, their remarks did little to quell the worries of voters. Overturning Roe v. Wade set the stage for a new era of state level legislation and plebiscites on the topic.

Until the Respect for Marriage Act came up for a vote, there was little in the way of federal legislation addressing the fallout of Dobbs. The act passed the House with 258 to 169, with 39 Republicans voting in favor of passing the bill. It passed the Senate with 61 votes, including 12 Republican votes.

The law itself requires the federal government and states to recognize a marriage if that marriage was valid in the state where it was performed, though it does not require states to issue a marriage license contrary to state law. It also federally guarantees that valid marriages between two people will be recognized regardless of the couple’s sex, race, ethnicity, or national origin.

The bill was able to garner support from some unlikely allies, including the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and the Interfaith Alliance, among others. Key to this support were specific amendments to the bill that prevent it being construed to diminish other federal laws providing for the protection of religious liberty.

Non-profit religious organizations will also not be required to provide services, facilities, or goods for the celebration of a given marriage, and their tax exempt status will not be challenged as a result.

In a statement following the passage of the bill in Congress, President Biden hailed the law as “a critical step to ensure that Americans have the right to marry the person they love.”

“While we are one step closer on our long journey to build a more perfect union, we must never stop fighting for full equality for LGBTQI+ Americans and all Americans,” Mr. Biden said.

In 2012, halfway through his tenure as vice president and three years ahead of the landmark Supreme Court ruling protecting same-sex marriages, Obergefell v. Hodges, Mr. Biden broke with President Obama in voicing his support for same-sex marriage. In a sign of just how rapidly the issue evolved, Mr. Obama changed his tune a little over a year later.

Support for same-sex marriage has steadily increased among Americans, according to Gallup polling on the topic. In 2021 some 70 percent of Americans supported same-sex marriage, up from 53 percent in 2011 and just under 40 percent in 2001.

The new law will be the first to codify one of the many rights Justice Thomas mentioned in his opinion. Though there is broad support for protections for the right to obtain contraceptives and abortion regulations similar to those enjoyed when Roe was still the law of the land, there is little sign of movement on federals laws on either topic.

For proponents of the Respect for Marriage Act, the new legislation still marks a win for “ensuring dignity and respect for all Americans,” according to a joint statement released by Senators Baldwin, Collin, Portman, Sinema, and Tillis.

“This commonsense legislation provides certainty to millions of loving couples in same-sex and interracial marriages, who will continue to enjoy the freedoms, rights, and responsibilities afforded to all other marriages,” the senators wrote.

The bill also marks a small victory for those who remain opposed to same-sex and interracial marriages because it does not afford the same protections that Obergefell does while also explicitly carving out religious exemptions.

If Obergefell were to be overturned, states would once again be allowed to outlaw same sex marriage in their state, similar to how states are now allowed to outlaw abortions, though they would still being required to recognize marriages from other states.