[Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents Volume 42, Number 23 (Monday, June 12, 2006)]
[Pages 1076-1077]
[Online from the Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

<R04>
Remarks on a Proposed Constitutional Amendment To Protect Marriage

June 5, 2006

    Thank you all. Please be seated. Good afternoon, and welcome to the 
White House. It is a pleasure to be with so many fine community leaders, 
scholars, family organizations, religious leaders, Republicans, 
Democrats, independents. Thank you all for coming.
    You come from many backgrounds and faith traditions--yet united in 
this common belief: Marriage is the most fundamental institution of 
civilization, and it should not be redefined by activist judges. You are 
here because you strongly support a constitutional amendment that 
defines marriage as a union of a man and a woman, and I am proud to 
stand with you.
    This week, the Senate begins debate on the marriage protection 
amendment, and I call on the Congress to pass this amendment, send it to 
the States for ratification so we can take this issue out of the hands 
of over-reaching judges and put it back where it belongs--in the hands 
of the American people.
    The union of a man and woman in marriage is the most enduring and 
important human institution. For ages, in every culture, human beings 
have understood that marriage is critical to the well-being of families. 
And because families pass along values and shape character, marriage is 
also critical to the health of society. Our policies should aim to 
strengthen families, not undermine them. And changing the definition of 
marriage would undermine the family structure.
    America is a free society which limits the role of government in the 
lives of our citizens. In this country, people are free to choose how 
they live their lives. In our free society, decisions about a 
fundamental social institution as marriage should be made by the people.
    The American people have spoken clearly on this issue through their 
elected Representatives and at the ballot box. In 1996, Congress 
approved the Defense of Marriage Act by large bipartisan majorities in 
both the House and the Senate, and President Clinton signed it into law. 
And since then, 19 States have held referendums to amend their State 
constitutions to protect the traditional definition of marriage. In 
every case, the amendments were approved by decisive majorities with an 
average of 71 percent.
    Today, 45 of the 50 States have either a State constitutional 
amendment or statute defining marriage as a union of a man and a woman. 
These amendments and laws express a broad consensus in our country for 
protecting the institution of marriage. The people have spoken. 
Unfortunately, this consensus is being undermined by activist judges and 
local officials who have struck down State laws protecting marriage and 
made an aggressive attempt to redefine marriage.
    Since 2004, State courts in Washington and California and Maryland 
and New York have ruled against marriage laws. Last year, a Federal 
judge in Nebraska overturned a State constitutional amendment banning 
same-sex marriage, an amendment that was approved by 70 percent of the 
population. And at this moment, nine States face lawsuits challenging 
the marriage laws they have on the books.
    Some argue that defining marriage should be left to the States. The 
fact is, State legislatures are trying to address this issue. But across 
the country, they are being thwarted by activist judges who are 
overturning the expressed will of their people. And these court 
decisions can have an impact on our whole Nation.
    The Defense of Marriage Act declares that no State is required to 
accept another State's

[[Page 1077]]

definition of marriage. If that act is overturned by the courts, then 
marriage recognized in one city or State may have to be recognized as 
marriages everywhere else. That would mean that every State would have 
to recognize marriage as redefined by judges in, say, Massachusetts or 
local officials in San Francisco, no matter what their own State laws or 
their State constitutions say.
    This national question requires a national solution. And on an issue 
of such profound importance, that solution should come not from the 
courts but from the people of the United States. An amendment to the 
Constitution is necessary because activist courts have left our Nation 
with no other choice. When judges insist on imposing their arbitrary 
will on the people, the only alternative left to the people is an 
amendment to the Constitution, the only law a court cannot overturn.
    The constitutional amendment that the Senate will consider this week 
would fully protect marriage from being redefined. It will leave State 
legislatures free to make their own choices in defining legal 
arrangements other than marriage. A constitutional amendment is the most 
democratic process by which our country can resolve this issue. In their 
wisdom, our founders set a high bar for amending the Constitution. An 
amendment must be approved by two-thirds of the House and the Senate and 
then ratified by three-fourths of the 50 State legislatures. This 
process guarantees that every State legislature and every community in 
our Nation will have a voice and a say in deciding this issue.
    A constitutional amendment would not take this issue away from the 
States, as some have argued. It would take the issue away from the 
courts and put it directly before the American people.
    As this debate goes forward, every American deserves to be treated 
with tolerance and respect and dignity. On an issue of this great 
significance, opinions are strong and emotions run deep. And all of us 
have a duty to conduct this discussion with civility and decency toward 
one another. All people deserve to have their voices heard, and a 
constitutional amendment will ensure that they are heard.
    I appreciate you taking an interest in this fundamental issue. It's 
an important issue for our country to debate and to resolve. And the 
best way to resolve this issue is through a constitutional amendment, 
which I strongly support. God bless.

Note: The President spoke at 1:48 p.m. in Room 450 of the Dwight D. 
Eisenhower Executive Office Building.