Michigan Rep Pushes to Overturn Same-Sex Marriage

Michigan state Representative Joshua Schriver plans to introduce a resolution urging the U.S. Supreme Court to reverse its landmark 2015 decision legalizing same-sex marriage nationwide. The Republican from Oxford announced his intent days ago sparking fierce debate over civil rights and judicial precedent. This move reignites a contentious issue nearly a decade after marriage equality became law.

Schriver’s resolution targets Obergefell v. Hodges the 5-4 ruling that required all states to recognize and perform same-sex marriages under the 14th Amendment. He argues it overstepped state authority and seeks to restore what he calls traditional marriage values. The proposal set for unveiling after a House session has already gained 12 cosponsors in Michigan.

This isn’t Schriver’s first swipe at marriage equality. In December 2024 he posted online calling to make gay marriage illegal again claiming it was forced on America by a flawed court. His remarks drew sharp rebukes from state leaders including Governor Gretchen Whitmer who vowed to protect fundamental rights for all Michiganders.

Opposition runs deep among Democrats and advocates who see the resolution as an attack on equality. Representative Jason Morgan a married gay lawmaker called it anti-family. Attorney General Dana Nessel also in a same-sex marriage questioned how undoing these unions benefits anyone. Their pushback reflects broad support for Obergefell in Michigan.

The idea isn’t isolated to Schriver. Similar resolutions have popped up in states like Idaho and Montana hinting at a coordinated effort among conservative lawmakers. It follows Justice Clarence Thomas’ 2022 suggestion that Obergefell could be reconsidered after Roe v. Wade’s fall raising fears among LGBTQ communities.

Legal experts doubt the Supreme Court would take up such a cause soon given its current makeup and public opinion favoring marriage rights. Polls show over 70 percent of Americans support same-sex marriage a sharp rise since 2015. Still Schriver’s move signals a persistent divide on social issues.

For Michigan’s gay couples the resolution stirs unease about hard-won freedoms. Activists plan protests arguing it’s a step backward from progress. They point to state laws protecting against discrimination as a bulwark but worry about broader implications if the court shifts further right.

Schriver frames his stance as defending conscience and tradition yet critics say it’s a losing battle out of touch with today’s values. As the resolution heads to debate it tests Michigan’s commitment to inclusion. For now it’s a symbolic salvo in a culture war that shows no sign of fading.