Dear [Your Elected Official],

<p>I urge you to vote NO on HB315 in the House Judiciary Committee on March 11.</p> <p>This bill, like the sponsor's other marriage bill, seems designed for a collision course with the Supreme Court's Obergefell decision. In November, the Supreme Court declined to revisit that decision when a former county clerk in Kentucky brought her challenge. </p> <p>The Judiciary Committee should consider a few matters.</p> <p>1. If this bill passes and a few of the 95 county clerks in this state decline to offer marriage licenses to same-sex couples, is the state liable as well as the county clerk when there is an inevitable federal court challenge?</p> <p>2. Please, fact check the sponsor's claims that the 2024 amendments to the code were a "mistake," as he put it in the Children & Family Affairs Subcommittee. Does he really believe that everyone made this mistake including current members of the House?</p> <p>3. Also fact check his point that the language, which he claims to be restoring, was about "male and female contracting parties." It was not. The 2023 language in that section of the code was about "applicants" and "proposed contracting parties."</p> <p>The committee should have an honest discussion about the purpose and risks of this bill.</p> <p>Thank you for considering my views.</p> <p> </p> <p> </p>