Compare SD HCR 6010 (2026) and SD HCR 6012 (2025)

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

282 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.

SD HCR 6010 (2026)SD HCR 6012 (2025)
Legislative Session HCR6010 2026 South Dakota Legislature House Concurrent Resolution 6010 Introduced by: Representative Randolph Underscores indicate new language. Overstrikes indicate deleted language. A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION urging the Supreme Court of the United States toLegislative 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
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 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 WHEREASWHEREAS, 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
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 andcomes 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
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 ConstitutionObergefell 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
as a font of substantive rights, a doctrine that 19 strays from the full meaning of the Constitutionas a 19 font of substantive rights, a doctrine that strays from the full meaning of the Constitution
and exalts judges at the expense of the people 20 from whom they derive their authority; and 21 26.168.18 2 HCR6010 Underscores indicate new language. Overstrikes indicate deleted language. WHEREASand 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
causes collateral 1 damage to other aspects of our constitutional order that protect liberty, including religious 2 liberty; and 3 WHEREAS, the Supreme Court recognized in the 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, 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 ci…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 underminin…
union of one man and one woman; andunion of one 27 man and one woman; and