al amendment banning same-gender marriage.)
Alaska, Florida, Indiana, Nebraska, South Dakota, and West Virginia define marriage as a legal union between a man and woman and prohibit recognition of same-gender marriages granted by other states.
Idaho, Louisiana, Montana, and South Carolina prohibit recognition of same-gender marriages granted by other states and declare same-gender marriages a violation of the state's public policy.
Colorado, Kansas, and Tennessee laws define marriage as a legal union between a man and a woman and declare same-gender marriage a violation of the state's public policy.
North Dakota law defines marriage as a legal union between a man and a woman, and spouse as only a person of the opposite gender who is legally married as a wife or husband. (Florida, North Dakota, and Texas are the only states that have adopted the federal DOMA definition of spouse as only a person of the opposite gender who is legally married as a wife or husband.)
Arizona, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Texas, Utah, and Virginia laws prohibit the recognition of same-gender marriages granted by other states.
California, Hawaii, Iowa, Minnesota, Nevada, and Washington laws define marriage as a legal union between a man and woman.
A number of states have taken other measures, not necessarily linked to the federal DOMA movement, to prohibit same-gender civil marriage.
Before passage of the federal DOMA, Maryland, New Hampshire, and Wyoming enacted laws to prohibit same-gender civil marriage.
An Ohio statute, replicated with a state constitutional amendment, prohibits same-gender civil marriages, civil unions, and domestic partnerships.
In 1971, the Wisconsin Supreme Court issued a ruling that only heterosexual marriages are legal.
In 2000, the Vermont High Court allowed the legislature to enact a statute prohibiting same-gender civil marriage, providing it also enact a law allowing civil unions for same-gender couples.
On November 18, 2003, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled that prohibiting same-gender couples from civil marriage violated the state's constitution. After the ruling, the state senate requested from the court an advisory opinion on the constitutionality of a proposed law that would ban same-gender civil marriage but would create civil unions as a parallel institution with all the same state benefits, protections, rights, and responsibilities as civil marriage. On February 4, 2004, the court answered, “segregating same-sex unions from opposite-sex unions cannot possibly be held rationally to advance or preserve” the governmental aim of encouraging “stable adult relationships for the good of the individual and of the community, especially its children.” As a result of the ruling, Massachusetts began issuing marriage licenses to same-gender couples on May 20, 2004. It is important to note that the Massachusetts marriage law is not recognized by the federal government and does not entitle same-gender married couples to any federal rights, benefits, or protections.
A small number of states have recently considered legislation to legalize same-gender civil marriages and domestic partnerships.
In 2005 the California legislature became the first in the country to pass a bill that would legalize same-gender civil marriage. However, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed the measure, noting that he preferred that the state supreme court decide the matter rather than legislators.
Maryland Governor Robert Ehrlich, Jr vetoed a domestic partnership registry approved by the state legislature in 2005.
Also in 2005, bills allowing for same-gender civil marriage were introduced in Maine and Rhode Island; however, they did not advance.
To date, 19 states have amended their constitutions to prohibit civil marriage by persons of the same gender. A number of these states already had enacted DOMA-like laws. Efforts to amend the constitutions of these states were undertaken in an effort to prohibit judges from overturning these statutory bans on the grounds that they violate state constitut