II 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 435 

To amend chapter 1 of title 1, United States Code, with regard to the 

definition of ‘‘marriage’’ and ‘‘spouse’’ for Federal purposes and to 

ensure respect for State regulation of marriage. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 10, 2015 

Mr. CRUZ (for himself, Mr. BOOZMAN, Mr. CRAPO, Mr. DAINES, Mr. INHOFE, 

Mr. LANKFORD, Mr. LEE, Mr. ROBERTS, Mr. SCOTT, Mr. SESSIONS, Mr. 

SHELBY, and Mr. VITTER) introduced the following bill; which was read 

twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To amend chapter 1 of title 1, United States Code, with 

regard to the definition of ‘‘marriage’’ and ‘‘spouse’’ 

for Federal purposes and to ensure respect for State 

regulation of marriage. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘State Marriage De5 fense Act of 2015’’. 

6 SEC. 2. FINDINGS. 

7 Congress finds the following: 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 435 IS

1 (1) Congress affirms the States’ legitimate and 

2 proper public policy interests in regulating domestic 

3 relations and in defining marriage for the residents 

4 of their States. 

5 (2) Despite striking down section 3 of the De6 fense of Marriage Act, the Supreme Court ruling in 

7 United States v. Windsor, 133 S. Ct. 2675 (2013) 

8 did not institute a new Federal definition of mar9 riage that includes same sex marriage. Instead, 

10 United States v. Windsor specifically required the 

11 Federal Government to defer to ‘‘state sovereign 

12 choices about who may be married’’ in determining 

13 marital status for Federal purposes. 

14 (3) Congress recognizes that current actions by 

15 the Federal Government to afford benefits to certain 

16 relationships not recognized as marriages by a per17 son’s State of residence go beyond the Supreme 

18 Court’s ruling in United States v. Windsor. These 

19 Federal actions create ‘‘two contradictory marriage 

20 regimes within the same State,’’ in direct contradic21 tion of United States v. Windsor. 

22 (4) Actions taken by the Federal Government 

23 to grant recognition of marital status for persons 

24 not recognized as married in their State of domicile 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 435 IS

1 undermine a State’s legitimate authority to define 

2 marriage for its residents. 

3 SEC. 3. AMENDMENT TO DEFINITION OF MARRIAGE FOR 

4 FEDERAL PURPOSES. 

5 Section 7 of title 1, United States Code, is amended 

6 to read as follows: 

7 ‘‘§ 7. Definition of ‘marriage’ and ‘spouse’ 

8 ‘‘For purposes of determining the meaning of any Act 

9 of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation 

10 of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the 

11 United States, as applied with respect to individuals domi12 ciled in a State or in any other territory or possession of 

13 the United States, the term ‘marriage’ shall not include 

14 any relationship which that State, territory, or possession 

15 does not recognize as a marriage, and the term ‘spouse’ 

16 shall not include an individual who is a party to a relation17 ship that is not recognized as a marriage by that State, 

18 territory, or possession.’’. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS