[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1080 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1080

  To amend title 28, United States Code, to limit the jurisdiction of 
     Federal courts to consider cases involving same-sex marriage.


_______________________________________________________________________


                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 23, 2015

   Mr. Cruz introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL


 
  To amend title 28, United States Code, to limit the jurisdiction of 
     Federal courts to consider cases involving same-sex marriage.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Protect Marriage from the Courts Act 
of 2015''.

SEC. 2. LEGISLATIVE FINDINGS.

    The Senate makes the following findings:
            (1) In Baker v. Nelson, 409 U.S. 810 (1972), the Supreme 
        Court of the United States upheld a State law defining marriage 
        as the union of one man and one woman against a constitutional 
        challenge by a same-sex couple seeking to marry. The Court 
        rejected the challenge in a one-sentence order that read, ``The 
        appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal 
        question.''.
            (2) The Supreme Court's judgment in Baker is as sound today 
        as it was then. Challenging a State marriage law on the basis 
        that it does not extend to same-sex couples raises no 
        substantial Federal question because nothing in the text or 
        history of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution of the United 
        States even arguably indicates a general public understanding 
        at the time of ratification that the ratifiers had adopted a 
        constitutional principle that invalidated State laws defining 
        marriage as a male-female union.
            (3) It follows that the power to decide whether to extend 
        the legal status and benefits of marriage to same-sex couples 
        does not belong to the courts, but rests instead with the 
        people through their elected State representatives, unless 
        their State constitutions provide otherwise. The Constitution 
        of the United States leaves it to the people of each State to 
        decide for themselves through their democratic processes how to 
        redefine the legal meaning of marriage for purposes of their 
        respective State laws.
            (4) Numerous Federal courts, including the United States 
        Courts of Appeals for the Fourth, Seventh, Ninth, and Tenth 
        Circuits, have nevertheless invalidated State marriage laws 
        that do not allow the licensing of same-sex marriages. In so 
        doing, these courts have exceeded their authority under the 
        Constitution and have usurped the people's exclusive authority 
        to decide this issue. Pending before the Supreme Court are 4 
        related cases challenging the marriage laws in Kentucky, 
        Michigan, Ohio, and Tennessee.
            (5) The purpose of this Act (including the amendment made 
        by this Act) is to maintain the authority of the States to 
        define marriage and to prevent, consistent with the 
        Constitution, any further unlawful action by Federal courts 
        until such time as an amendment to the Constitution is enacted 
        unequivocally guaranteeing that the States have the power to 
        define marriage as limited to the union of one man and one 
        woman.
            (6) This Act prevents that unlawful action by eliminating 
        the jurisdiction of all courts created by Federal law, as well 
        as the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, to 
        adjudicate claims pertaining to the constitutionality of State 
        marriage laws. Because section 1 of article III of the 
        Constitution gives Congress the power to ``ordain and 
        establish'' ``inferior Courts'', the Supreme Court has long 
        held that Congress has the power to limit the jurisdiction of 
        the lower Federal courts. See Palmore v. United States, 411 
        U.S. 389, 400-01 (1973). In addition, section 2 of article III 
        of the Constitution gives Congress the power to make 
        ``Exceptions'' to the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme 
        Court. The Supreme Court itself has acknowledged that this 
        power applies even to cases that are pending before the Court. 
        See Ex parte McCardle, 74 U.S. (7 Wall.) 506, 514 (1869).
            (7) Finally, this Act makes clear that a court's judgment 
        only applies to the parties before the court and that 
        nonparties have no legal obligation to comply with the decision 
        until so ordered by a court.

SEC. 3. LIMITATION OF JURISDICTION.

    (a) In General.--Chapter 99 of title 28, United States Code, is 
amended by adding at the end the following:
``Sec. 1632. Limitations on Federal jurisdiction
    ``(a) No court created by Federal law shall have jurisdiction, and 
the Supreme Court shall have no appellate jurisdiction, to adjudicate 
or enforce any claim pertaining to the validity, under the Constitution 
of the United States, of a State law, or State administrative or 
judicial decision, that--
            ``(1) defines marriage as limited to the union of one man 
        and one woman; or
            ``(2) refuses State recognition of or allows the State to 
        refuse recognition of same-sex marriages performed and licensed 
        in other States.
    ``(b) To the extent that either a court created by Federal law or 
the Supreme Court has entered a final judgment on a claim described in 
subsection (a) before the effective date of this section, that judgment 
binds only the parties to the case. No person who is not a party to the 
case shall have any obligation to comply with the decision in the 
case.''.
    (b) Severability.--If any provision of this Act, an amendment made 
by this Act, or the application of such provision or amendment to any 
person or circumstance is held to be unconstitutional, the remainder of 
this Act, the amendments made by this Act, and the application of such 
provision or amendment to any person or circumstance shall not be 
affected.
    (c) Effective Date and Application.--
            (1) Effective date.--This Act (including the amendment made 
        by this Act) takes effect on the date of enactment of this Act.
            (2) Application.--This Act applies to all claims pending on 
        or after that date of enactment.
    (d) Amendments to the Table of Sections.--The table of sections for 
chapter 99 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by adding at the 
end the following:

``1632. Limitations on Federal jurisdiction.''.
                                 <all>