Pennsylvania House passes marriage equality bill, sending measure to Senate

The Pennsylvania House of Representatives passed legislation Wednesday to align state law with the Supreme Court’s landmark 2015 marriage equality ruling, voting 127-72 to send the measure to the Republican-controlled Senate.

House Bill 1800, sponsored by Rep. Malcolm Kenyatta, D-Philadelphia, would repeal a 1996 state statute defining marriage as a union between one man and one woman — a provision that federal courts have rendered unenforceable — replacing it with language defining marriage as “a civil contract between two individuals.”

The bill also would strike language declaring that same-sex marriages performed in other states are void in Pennsylvania.

Supporters argued the measure is both a practical update and a necessary safeguard at a moment when federal protections for same-sex marriage face renewed legal uncertainty.

“Our Commonwealth and our laws have not kept up with the court decision,” Kenyatta said on the House floor Wednesday. “As important as HB 1800 is for me, for my family, it’s also a very simple bill that ensures that our laws reflect the law of this land as held in Obergefell.”

Kenyatta, who married his husband, Dr. Matthew Kenyatta, on Feb. 5, 2022, spoke candidly about the personal stakes of the vote.

He described refreshing a browser waiting for the Supreme Court’s June 26, 2015, ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges and invoked the practical protections marriage provides — hospital visitation rights, shared finances and legal standing — to push back against characterizations of the bill as merely symbolic.

“Marriage is not symbolic,” Kenyatta said. “There are legal, there are practical, there are financial things connected to the institution of marriage.”

House Majority Leader Matthew Bradford, D-Montgomery County, urged colleagues to consider what might happen to Obergefell under the current Supreme Court.

He cited Justice Clarence Thomas’s concurrence in the 2022 decision overturning Roe v. Wade, in which Thomas argued the court should reconsider substantive due process precedents — including rulings establishing same-sex marriage and contraception rights.

“Let us today put into law in Pennsylvania what those who plot to undermine those rights would take from us,” Bradford said.

Congress passed the federal Respect for Marriage Act in 2022, which requires the federal government and all states to recognize valid same-sex marriages. But the law has a critical limit: if the Supreme Court were to overturn Obergefell, states would not be required to issue new marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

HB 1800 would close that gap in Pennsylvania by anchoring marriage equality in state statute.

Several Republicans voted against the bill, arguing that government-recognized marriage is either unnecessary or that the legislation lacks religious liberty protections.

Rep. Bryan Cutler, R-Lancaster, said he believes marriage is a religious covenant that predates state involvement and questioned whether government should define marriage at all.

He also argued the bill should include explicit protections for people who hold traditional views on marriage, pointing to the case of Washington state florist Barronelle Stutzman, who faced a civil rights lawsuit after declining to provide flowers for a same-sex wedding.

“If we really want a moderate proposal that recognizes the interests of both sides, why not include that recognition in the law?” Cutler said.

Rep. Stephanie Borowicz, R-Clinton, also spoke in opposition, calling marriage “a sacred covenant, an institution created by God between a man and a woman, not a civil contract between two individuals.”

Rep. Charity Grimm Krupa, R-Fayette, said she voted for a previous version of the bill last session but reversed course Wednesday, calling marriage a sacred covenant between a man and a woman.

She argued the legislation reframes marriage as a civil contract, stripping it of what she called its deeper social and moral purpose.

“I believe that we should be strengthening the institution of marriage, not redefining it in a way that strips it of its unique purpose,” Grimm Krupa said.

Kenyatta closed his remarks by meeting his opponents on their own ground, citing Scripture directly at colleagues who had framed their opposition in religious terms.

“Whoever claims to love God yet hates a brother or sister is a liar,” Kenyatta said, quoting the First Letter of John. “For whoever does not love their brother and sister who they have seen cannot love God who they have not seen.”

Lehigh County Executive Josh Siegel, a Democrat who previously served in the state House before his election last year, welcomed the vote. Siegel said Pennsylvania — as the state where the nation’s founding principles of freedom were established — has an obligation to protect the right to marry.

“It’s about damn time that Pennsylvania updates its definition of marriage,” Siegel said, adding that the law should not stand in the way of two people who love each other.

The bill also drew local support, with Rep. Michael Schlossberg, D-132nd District, signing on as a co-sponsor.

Gov. Josh Shapiro also celebrated the vote, calling the bill’s passage a reflection of Pennsylvania’s core values. “Here in Pennsylvania, we believe in your freedom to marry who you love,” Shapiro said in a statement. “Today, the House has stepped up to protect that right.”

The bill now heads to the state Senate, where Republicans hold the majority. A comparable measure cleared the House last session by a wider 133-68 margin with roughly 32 Republican votes; Wednesday’s bill passed with somewhat narrower bipartisan support.

That earlier version was never brought to a vote in the Senate.

HB 1800 on the Pennsylvania General Assembly website