Marriage Protection Act of 2004

MARRIAGE PROTECTION ACT OF 2004 -- (House of Representatives - July 22, 2004)

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 734, I call up the bill (H.R. 3313) to amend title 28, United States Code, to limit Federal court jurisdiction over questions under the Defense of Marriage Act, and ask for its immediate consideration.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. DEGETTE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 3313, the so-called "Marriage Protection Act."

I was really tempted to offer an amendment mandating that every Member of Congress watch "School House Rock" before they are allowed to cast another vote. If you have kids, you are probably familiar with School House Rock. It is the old, ever-popular kids show that explains how American government works. It imparts information on basic civics in fun and easy to understand terms, for example, how there are three branches of government that provide the check and balances that are the bedrock of our country.

But then I decided that, although more of my colleagues than I ever believed possible desperately need this sort of basic primer on government, it didn't seem fair to waste Members' time, like our time is being wasted today as we are forced to debate and vote on this utterly absurd piece of legislation.

Our Founding Fathers established clear separation of powers between the three branches of government. Rep. HOSTETTLER and the Republican leadership are trying to dictate to our formerly independent judiciary what cases it can or cannot consider. This is a court-stripping measure that could lead to Congress's removal of the courts' jurisdiction any time a controversial measure might come before the federal bench.

The Hostettler bill would ban any federal court, including the Supreme Court, from having jurisdiction over challenges to the Defense of Marriage Act. This would mark a nearly unprecedented effort by one independent branch of the federal government, the Congress, to limit the jurisdiction of the judiciary branch.

This is the Republican leadership's last ditch effort to get a vote on gay marriage in the House to effect the election this fall. We are considering legislation to pre-empt an action that has not taken place. The Defense of Marriage Act, which passed in 1996, is not being challenged. This is a cop out, not a compromise. They know they don't have the votes on the Federal Marriage Amendment so they are grasping at straws.

In Federalist Paper 78, Alexander Hamilton defended the need for an independent judiciary. As the only branch of the federal government not swayed by campaigning, Hamilton asserted that it was the branch best able to protect the Constitution from political meddling by the Congress or the President. He also foresaw just the type of action being attempted by Republicans in Congress today, warning "..... there is no liberty, if the power of judging be not separated from the legislative and executive powers.

If this bill, by some miracle were actually to be signed into law, and by an even bigger miracle, was not immediately overturned because of its blatant unconstitutionality, it would be a horrible precedent in preventing the most basic redress available to the American people.

Imagine bill after bill being passed in Congress, with the same language tacked on at the end saying that once this law passes it can never be challenged in the federal courts, including the Supreme Court. Today the issue is gay marriage, but tomorrow the issue could be anything.

This bill is incredibly short-sighted and it goes against the very principles that so many of its supporters purport to honor as public servants. It really would be laughable if it weren't so scary.

I urge a "no" vote on this ridiculous, unconstitutional and frankly un-American bill.