Should the Federal Gov’t Not Discriminate Against People Based on Their Views About Marriage or Premarital Sex? (S. 2525)

What is S. 2525?

(Updated January 22, 2022)

This bill — known as the First Amendment Defense Act — would prohibit the federal government from taking a discriminatory action against a person based on their beliefs about the definition of marriage or premarital sex. “Person” would be defined as any individual or institution regardless of religious affiliation except for publicly traded for-profit companies; federal employees or federal for-profit contractors operating within the scope of their job; and hospitals or healthcare entities with respect to visitation, recognition of a designated representative of healthcare decisions, or refusal to provide medical treatment necessary to cure an illness or injury.

Individuals or institutions that are discriminated against by the federal government for their views could file suit in federal court and seek injunctive relief (like a court order to stop the discrimination), declaratory relief (ie a binding ruling on the matter), and compensatory damages.

Argument in favor

The federal government shouldn’t discriminate against individuals or entities based on their views about marriage or premarital sex, and this bill ensures it doesn’t happen.

Argument opposed

This bill would open the door to discrimination by government contractors and private companies against people in same sex marriages, single parents, and others.

Impact

Persons expressing beliefs about the definition of marriage or premarital sex; and government agencies.

Cost of S. 2525

A CBO cost estimate is unavailable.

Additional Info

In-Depth: Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) introduced this bill to create protections for Americans from federal punishment over their beliefs about marriage or premarital sex that are similar to protections for people who decline to participate in abortions. It came about in response to the suggestion by President Obama’s solicitor general during oral arguments in Obergefell v. Hodges that the IRS might deny tax-exempt status to religious schools that operate in accordance with their beliefs:

“What an individual or organization believes about the traditional definition of marriage is not — and never should be — a part of the government’s decision-making process when distributing licenses, accreditations, or grants. And the First Amendment Defense Act simply ensures that this will always be true in America — that federal bureaucrats will never have the authority to require those who believe in the traditional definition of marriage to choose between their living in accordance with those beliefs and maintaining their occupation or tax status.”

The American Civil Liberties Union’s (ACLU) legislative representative, Ian Thompson, called this bill “shameful” and a “blatant example of using religion as a justification to discriminate” and added:

“This bill opens the door to a wide range of taxpayer-funded discrimination. It would let private companies and nonprofit government contractors — which includes a significant portion of social services providers — refuse to provide a service or benefit to people because they do not fit their definition of family, from same-sex married couples and their children, a single parent and their child, or an unmarried couple who are living together.”

This legislation has the support of 22 cosponsors, all of whom are Republicans.

Media:

• Sponsoring Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) Press Release
  
• CNN
  
• NBC
  
• ACLU (Opposed)
  
• Human Rights Campaign (Opposed)