Compare MT SJ 15 (2025) and SD HCR 6010 (2026)

The introduced text of these two bills, side by side, with the wording they share.

318 shared 8-word phrases found in the introduced text of these two bills.

This highlights wording the two bills share in their introduced text. A shared passage may include text that both bills quote from the same existing law, not only language either one drafted. A match shows that the texts overlap; it does not show who drafted a bill, and filing order alone does not show which bill copied which.

MT SJ 15 (2025)SD HCR 6010 (2026)
in Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U.S. 644 10 (2015), is at odds with the Constitution of the United States and the principles on which the United States was 11 established; and 12 WHEREAS, liberty has long been understood as individual freedom from government action, not as a 13 right to a particular governmental entitlement; and 14 WHEREAS, Obergefell involves a definition of "liberty" that the framers would not have recognizedin 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 was 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, Obergefell, in invoking a definition of “liberty” that the Framers would not have 8 recognized
comes from the government; and 17 WHEREAS, when the framers proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence that "all men are created 18 equal" and are "endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights," they referred to a vision of mankind 19 in which all humans are created in the image of God and are therefore of inherent worth; and 20 WHEREAS, Obergefell undermines this vision by declaring that citizens must seek dignity from the 21 state; and 22 WHEREAS, Obergefell relies on the dangerous fiction of treating the Due Process Clause of the 14th 23 Amendment of the Constitution as a font of substantive rights, a doctrine that strays from the full meaning of the 24 Constitution and ex…comes from the 10 government; and 11 WHEREAS, when the Framers proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence that "all men 12 are created equal" and "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 14 therefore are of inherent worth; and 15 WHEREAS, Obergefell undermines this vision by declaring that citizens must seek dignity 16 from the state; and 17 WHEREAS, Obergefell relies on the dangerous fiction of treating the due process clause of 18 the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution as a font of substantive rights, a doctrine that 19 strays from the full meaning of the Constitutio…
WHEREAS, Obergefell's inversion of the original meaning of liberty causes collateral damage to other 26 aspects of our constitutional order that protect liberty, including religious liberty; and 27 WHEREAS, theWHEREAS, Obergefell's inversion of the original meaning of liberty causes collateral 1 damage to other aspects of our constitutional order that protect liberty, including religious 2 liberty; and 3 WHEREAS, the
United States v. Windsor, 570 U.S. 744 28 (2013), that the definition of marriage is "an area that has long been regarded as a virtually exclusive provinceUnited 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
and not the Supreme Court, has the right to regulate marriage for its 2 citizens; and 3 WHEREAS, Obergefell requires states to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples and to 4 recognize same-sex marriages in complete contravention of their own state constitutions and the will of their 5 voters and thus undermines the civil liberties of those states' residents and voters; and 6 WHEREAS, marriage as an institution has been recognized as the union of one man and one woman 7 for more than 2,000 years and within common law, the basis of the United States' Anglo-American legal 8 tradition, for more than 800 years; and 9 WHEREASand not the Supreme Court, 6 has the right to regulate marriage for its citizens; and 7 WHEREAS, Obergefell requires states to issue marriage licenses to same sex couples and 8 to recognize same-sex marriages in complete contravention of their own state constitutions 9 and the will of their voters, thus undermining the civil liberties of those states' residents and 10 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 13 United States' Anglo-American legal tradition, for more than 800 years; and 14 WHEREAS
and 9 WHEREAS, Obergefell arbitrarily and unjustly rejected this definition of marriage in favor of a novel, 10 flawed interpretation of key clauses within the Constitution of our nation's legal and cultural precedents; and 11 WHEREAS, the Obergefell decision was illegitimate because two of the justices in the majority ruling, 12 Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Elena Kagan, had previously officiated same-sex weddings and thus were 13 not impartial triers of fact and therefore should have recused themselves according to 28 U.S.C. 455; and 14 WHEREAS, since court rulings are not laws and only legislatures elected by the people may pass laws, 15 Obergefell is an illegitimate overreachand 16 WHEREAS, Obergefell arbitrarily and unjustly rejected this definition of marriage in favor 17 of a novel, flawed interpretation of key clauses within the Constitution and our nation's legal 18 and cultural precedents; and 19 WHEREAS, the Obergefell decision was illegitimate because two of the Justices in the 20 majority ruling, Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Elena Kagan, had previously officiated 21 same-sex weddings, and thus were not impartial triers of fact, and therefore should have 22 recused themselves according to 28 U.S.C. § 455 (December 1, 1990); and 23 WHEREAS, since court rulings are not laws and only legislatures elected by the people 24 may pass laws, Obergefell is an…