Text of SD HCR 6012 (2025)
Urging the Supreme Court of the United States to establish marriage as between a man and a woman.
Legislative text is a public record. Where LegiScan supplied it, the CC BY 4.0 credit applies.
Source: LegiScan. Bill data and text from LegiScan (legiscan.com), licensed CC BY 4.0 and used in modified form. LegiScan does not endorse the Trans Data Initiative. License: CC BY 4.0(opens another site). Source page(opens another site)
As introduced
4,849 characters
25.819.19
100th Legislative Session
HCR6012
2025 South Dakota Legislature
House Concurrent Resolution
6012
Introduced by: Representative Randolph
Underscores indicate new language.
Overstrikes indicate deleted language.
A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION, Urging the Supreme Court of the United States to
1
establish marriage as between a man and a woman.
2
WHEREAS, the decision by the Supreme Court of the United States in Obergefell v.
3
Hodges, 576 U.S. 644 (2015), is at odds with the Constitution of the United States and the
4
principles upon which the United States is established; and
5
WHEREAS, liberty has long been understood as individual freedom from governmental
6
action, not as a right to a particular governmental entitlement; and
7
WHEREAS, the ruling in Obergefell invokes a definition of "liberty" that the founders of the
8
United States would not have recognized, rejecting the idea captured in the Declaration of
9
Independence that human dignity is innate, and instead suggested that it comes from the
10
government; and
11
WHEREAS, when the founders proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence that all men
12
are created equal and are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, they
13
referred to a vision of mankind in which all humans are created in the image of God and are
14
therefore of inherent worth; and
15
WHEREAS, the ruling in Obergefell undermines this vision by declaring that citizens must
16
seek dignity from the state; and
17
WHEREAS, the ruling in Obergefell relies on the dangerous fiction of treating the Due
18
Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States as a
19
font of substantive rights, a doctrine that strays from the full meaning of the Constitution of
20
the United States and exalts judges at the expense of the people from whom they derive their
21
authority; and
22
25.819.19
2
HCR6012
Underscores indicate new language.
Overstrikes indicate deleted language.
WHEREAS, the ruling in Obergefell inverts the original meaning of liberty and causes
1
collateral damage to other aspects of our constitutional order that protect liberty, including
2
religious liberty; and
3
WHEREAS, the Supreme Court recognized in United States v. Windsor, 570 U.S. 744
4
(2013), that the definition of marriage is an area that has long been regarded as a virtually
5
exclusive province of the States, meaning that South Dakota, and not the Supreme Court,
6
has the right to regulate marriage for its citizens; and
7
WHEREAS, the ruling in Obergefell requires states to issue marriage licenses to same sex
8
couples and to recognize same-sex marriages in complete contravention of their own state
9
constitutions and the will of their voters, thus undermining the civil liberties of those states'
10
residents and voters; and
11
WHEREAS, marriage as an institution has been recognized as the union of one man and
12
one woman for more than two thousand years and within common law, the basis of the United
13
States' Anglo-American legal tradition, for more than eight hundred years; and
14
WHEREAS, the ruling in Obergefell arbitrarily and unjustly rejected this definition of
15
marriage in favor of a novel, flawed interpretation of key clauses within the Constitution of
16
the United States and our nation's legal and cultural precedents; and
17
WHEREAS, the ruling in Obergefell was illegitimate because two of the Supreme Court
18
Justices in the majority ruling, Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Elena Kagan, had previously
19
officiated same-sex weddings, and thus were not impartial triers of fact, and therefore should
20
have recused themselves according to 28 U.S.C. § 455 (December 1, 1990); and
21
WHEREAS, case precedent in Obergefell is an overreach;
22
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the House of Representatives of the One
23
Hundredth Legislature of the State of South Dakota, the Senate concurring therein, that the
24
South Dakota Legislature protests the Obergefell decision; and
25
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Supreme Court of the United States be urged to
26
reverse the ruling in Obergefell and restore the natural definition of marriage, a union of one
27
man and one woman; and
28
25.819.19
3
HCR6012
Underscores indicate new language.
Overstrikes indicate deleted language.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the South Dakota Legislature urges the Supreme Court
1
to return to the long standing, traditional meaning of marriage recognized by the founders
2
and our society.
3