House fails to adopt constitutional amendment on right to marry after debate over religious-freedom language

The House considered Senate Substitute 2 for Senate Bill 100, a constitutional amendment proposed to guarantee the right to marry the person one loves regardless of gender or race. Sponsor Representative Snyder Hall said the amendment codifies rights already reflected in state law and explicitly preserves religious freedom.

During floor discussion, Representative Cam Smith asked about a drafting change that removed a narrow example (the specific right of clergy to refuse to solemnize a marriage). Deputy Gottschalk, a drafting attorney from the Division of Legislative Services, explained that the explicit example was removed to avoid an unduly narrow reading and to ensure the religious-freedom clarification applied broadly to religious practices.

Despite sponsor support and several favorable remarks, the measure did not receive the two-thirds vote required to amend the constitution and failed in the House.