Protesters walked out of an Idaho committee hearing on same-sex marriage. Here’s why
The Idaho House could soon vote on formally asking that the state once again be allowed to ban marriages between same-sex couples.
The resolution, if passed by both chambers of the Legislature, would result in Idaho sending a letter to the U.S. Supreme Court requesting that the justices reverse a 2015 precedent that provides protections for same-sex couples.
A Wednesday morning hearing turned into a two-hour debate about Christian scripture, morality, tax benefits, states’ rights, and the implications of forbidding same-sex couples from marrying — a right that they have had in Idaho for more than a decade.
Several dozen demonstrators staged a protest at the public hearing, filling the Capitol committee room before walking out en masse just as Rep. Heather Scott, R-Blanchard, began to introduce her proposal. It later passed on a party-line vote, with all 13 Republicans on the committee supporting the legislation.
Sue Latta was one of several people who sued Idaho in 2013 over its ban on same-sex unions. A federal magistrate judge in Idaho ruled was unconstitutional in 2014. The U.S. Supreme Court decision followed a year later.
“We are not asking for special rights, we are asking for equal rights,” Latta testified.
Scott’s proposal calls the 2015 decision to legalize same-sex marriage in Obergefell v. Hodges by the nation’s highest court an “illegitimate overreach.” It asked the court to reinstate the “natural definition of marriage” — identifying that as between one man and one woman.
“This is a threat to religious liberty,” Scott said Wednesday of the court’s ruling. “I don’t think marriage is a fundamental right.”
The landmark Obergefell decision allowed gay couples to wed across the country, even in states that still banned unions for people of the same gender. The ruling also was widely recognized as a turning point in Americans’ views on same-sex marriage, which national polling from the Pew Research Center showed has become much more favorable over the last two decades.
But the Supreme Court’s decision came by a narrow 5-4 vote. Since then, Republican President Donald Trump appointed three new conservative justices during his first term, shifting the court to the right. Two of the court’s most hard-line conservatives, Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, have previously written that the Obergefell decision should be reconsidered.
Massachusetts organization takes credit for resolution
A Massachusetts-based organized called MassResistance has taken credit for Scott’s resolution. Similar versions of the effort have been introduced in Wyoming, Montana and other states. The group’s website notes that an Idaho House member “offered to spearhead” the resolution this year, but did not identify the lawmaker.
Asked by an Idaho Statesman reporter Wednesday whether she worked with the organization on the bill, Scott declined to comment. And in a response to a public records request last week, Scott said she did not have any communications with the group.
According to its website, MassResistance considers homosexuality a mental disorder, has called LGBTQ+ events displays of “open depravity,” and has chapters active in Nigeria and Kenya — two African countries with anti-sodomy laws.
“(People) are not born homosexual,” said Arthur Schaper, a representative of the group, at Wednesday’s hearing.
Republicans focus on Christian Bible passages
At Wednesday’s hearing, three Christian pastors testified in favor of LGBTQ+ rights, and were asked by Republican lawmakers about the scriptural underpinnings for their views. The lines of questioning painted marriage rights for LGBTQ+ couples as at odds with a biblical worldview.
“Where do you derive moral authority from?” Rep. Brent Crane, R-Nampa, the committee’s chairman, asked one speaker.
Rep. Clint Hostetler, R-Twin Falls, asked supporters of same-sex marriage whether the “hundreds of millions” of atrocities “chalked up to the atheistic mindset” would mean that “going down this road without a moral foundation can leave us, as one has said, with our feet planted in midair?”
Over a dozen residents said they opposed the resolution, recounting stories about decades-long life partnerships with a member of the same gender, or having gay parents or friends.
Dr. Vaun Archibald, a Boise pediatrician, said he thought the resolution was a “grave mistake and a horrible use of our time and energy.”
“What is this going to accomplish other than just taking us backwards and making people feel alienated?” he testified.
Julianne Young, a former Republican House member from Blackfoot, showed up to the hearing to support the resolution.
“What we are really talking about is the positive rights associated with marriage, which some people believe they are entitled to,” Young said. “Those positive rights come at a cost to society at large. And so by virtue of that fact, I — as a private citizen — am required to endorse and support something that violates my freedom of conscience.”
The committee’s two Democrats, Boise Reps. Todd Achilles and Annie Morley, a temporary substitute for Rep. Brooke Green, also of Boise, voted against the resolution. Achilles called it an effort to violate gay rights, and added that same-sex couples could end up losing tax benefits and other advantages granted through a marriage license. The memorial itself does not carry the force of law.
Josh Lee, a reverend who recently moved to Boise to become a pastor at a local church, told the committee he spent years struggling with his sexuality and went to conversion therapy. He later planned to take his own life before developing a gay-affirming view and preaching to others in the hopes that they will be spared from a similar experience.
“While some Christians focus on saving people from the hell to come, I’m committed to saving people from the hell they live in right now,” he said. “That’s why I am here.”
This story was originally published January 22, 2025 at 1:39 PM.
