The Virginia House of Representatives on Tuesday approved a resolution that seeks to repeal a state constitutional amendment that defines marriage as between a man and a woman.

The resolution that state Del. Mark Sickles (D-Fairfax County) introduced by a 58-35 vote margin. State Sen. Adam Ebbin (D-Alexandria) has proposed an identical measure in the Virginia Senate.

Ebbin and Sickles are both gay.

Voters approved the Marshall-Newman Amendment in 2006.

Same-sex couples have been able to legally marry in Virginia since 2014. Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin last year signed a bill that codified marriage equality in state law.

The General Assembly in 2021 approved a resolution that seeks to repeal the Marshall-Newman Amendment. It must pass in two successive legislatures before it can go to the ballot.

The Senate Privileges and Elections Committee on Tuesday advanced Ebbin’s resolution by a 10-4 vote margin. The House on Tuesday also approved resolutions that would enshrine reproductive rights and restore formerly incarcerated people’s right to vote in the state constitution.

The Indian Supreme Court on Jan. 9 rejected a series of petitions that challenged its 2023 ruling against marriage equality

A 5-judge bench — Justices Bhushan Ramkrishna Gavai, Surya Kant, Bengaluru Venkataramiah Nagarathna, Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, and Dipankar Datta — said there were no errors in the ruling that justified a review.

A five-judge Supreme Court bench, led by Chief Justice Dhananjaya Yeshwant Chandrachud, on Oct. 17, 2023, in a 3-2 decision ruled against recognizing the constitutional validity of same-sex marriages in India.

The court emphasized it is parliament’s rule to decide whether to extend marriage rights to same-sex couples. It also acknowledged its function is limited to interpreting laws, not creating them.

The judges on Jan. 9 stated they had reviewed the original rulings.

“We do not find any error apparent on the face of the record,” they said. “We further find that the view expressed in both the judgments is in accordance with law and as such, no interference is warranted. Accordingly, the review petitions are dismissed.”

A new bench of judges formed on July 10, 2024, after Justice Sanjiv Khanna unexpectedly recused himself from hearing the appeals, citing personal reasons. The reconstituted bench included Narasimha, who was part of the original group of judges who delivered the ruling.

“The fact that we have lost is a comma and not a full stop for equality,” said Harish Iyer, a prominent LGBTQ rights activist in India and one of the plaintiffs of marriage equality case. “The admission of review petitions is a rarity, and while we will proceed with all legal recourses available this is not the only fight.”

Some of the plaintiffs in November 2023 appealed the Supreme Court’s original decision. Udit Sood and other lawyers who had represented them in the original marriage equality case filed the appeal.

The appeal argued the ruling contained “errors apparent on the face of the record,” and described the earlier ruling as “self-contradictory and manifestly unjust.” It criticized the court for acknowledging the plaintiffs face discrimination, but then dismissing their claims with “best wishes for the future,” contending this approach fails to fulfill the court’s constitutional obligations toward queer Indians and undermines the separation of powers envisioned in the constitution. The appeal also asserted the majority ruling warrants review because it summarily dismissed established legal precedents and made the “chilling declaration” that the constitution does not guarantee a fundamental right to marry, create a family, or form a civil union.

While speaking to the Washington Blade, Iyer said this setback is a reminder that our futures can be shaped by collaboration and numerous small victories along the way.

“We will have a multi-pronged approach,” he said. “We need to speak to parents groups, teachers, police personnel, doctors, and medical staff, news reporters, podcasters, grassroots activists, activists from allied movements, our local/state and national level elected representatives. We all need to do our bit in our circle of influence. These small waves will create a force that will help us propel toward marriage equality.”

Iyer told the Blade he is confident the community will achieve marriage equality within his lifetime, offering assurance to every queer individual.

“I just hope that I am not too old to find someone to marry with by then.”

As per the Supreme Court’s rules, a ruling is reviewed only if there is a mistake or error apparent on the face of the record, the discovery of new evidence, or any reason equivalent to these two. Justices typically consider appeals without oral arguments, circulating them among themselves in chambers. The same set of justices who issued the original ruling typically rules on the appeal. In this case, however, Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and S. Ravindra Bhat, and Chandrachud, who were part of the original bench, had retired.

Souvik Saha, founder of Jamshedpur Queer Circle, an LGBTQ organization that conducts sensitization workshops with law enforcement and local communities, described the Supreme Court’s refusal to hear the appeal as not just a legal setback, but a significant blow to the hopes of millions of LGBTQ people across India. He said the decision perpetuates a sense of exclusion, denying the community the constitutional promise of equality under Article 14 and the right to live with dignity under Article 21.

“This decision comes at a time when global momentum on marriage equality is growing,” said Saha, noting Taiwan and more than 30 other countries around the world have extended marriage rights to same-sex couples. “The lack of recognition in India, despite the 2018 Navtej Johar judgement — decriminalizing homosexuality, leaves the LGBTQ community in a vulnerable position.”

Saha further noted in Jharkhand, a state in eastern India where socio-cultural stigmas run deep, the Supreme Court’s refusal highlights the fight for equality is far from over.

He shared the Jamshedpur Queer Circle recently supported a young lesbian couple who were disowned by their families and faced threats when attempting to formalize their relationship. Saha stressed that without legal safeguards, such couples are left without recourse, underscoring the urgent need for marriage equality to ensure protection and recognition for LGBTQ people.

“While the decision delays progress, it cannot halt the movement for equality,” said Saha. “Marriage equality is inevitable in a country where nearly 60 percent of Indians aged 18-34 believe that same-sex couples should have the right to marry (Ipsos LGBT+ Pride Survey, 2021.) This ruling highlights the need to shift our advocacy strategy towards building a stronger case for social and political change.”

Saha proposed several calls to action and strategies for moving forward.

He emphasized to the Blade the need for mobilizing the community through state-level consultations and storytelling campaigns to humanize the issue of marriage equality. Saha also highlighted the importance of developing stronger petitions, supported by case studies, international precedents, and data to effectively address judicial concerns.

Saha suggested working with allies in civil society and corporate India to push for incremental changes. He advocated for engaging policymakers in dialogue to promote legislative reforms, emphasizing the economic benefits of inclusion. Saha also called for campaigns to counter misinformation and prejudice, while establishing counseling and support groups for LGBTQ people and their families that provide guidance and support.

“Legal recognition of marriage is not just about ceremony; it is about the basic rights, dignity, and respect that every individual deserves,” said Saha. “Together, through collective action, we will ensure that the arc of justice bends in our favor.”

Indrani Chakraborty, an LGBTQ activist and mother of Amulya Gautam, a transgender student from Guwahati in Assam state, described the Supreme Court’s appeal denial as an “insensitive approach.”

“Love and commitment are emotions that can never be under boundaries. Rejection of same-sex marriage is an oppressive approach towards the LGBTQI+ community,” said Chakraborty. “This is discrimination. Marriage provides social and legal security to the couple and that should be irrespective of gender. Same-sex relationships will be there as always even with or without any constitutional recognition. The fight should go on, as I believe, this validates the intention. The community needs to stand bold, and equality be achieved.”

Far-right U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) leveled the baseless and false accusation that U.S. Rep. Sarah McBride (D-Del.) a “groomer” and “child predator” in a post on X Monday, responding to a video shared by the anti-LGBTQ account Libs of TikTok in which the freshman congresswoman is seen reading to kids in a classroom.

According to the signage featured in the clip, McBride, who is the first transgender member of Congress, was participating in the Human Rights Campaign Foundation’s “Jazz and Friends National Day of School and Community Readings.”

The program is part of the organization’s Welcoming Schools initiative, which provides “trainings and resources for elementary school educators” to help “welcome diverse families, create LGBTQ and gender inclusive schools, prevent bias-based bullying, and support transgender and nonbinary students.”

Prior to her first election to the Delaware state legislature, McBride served as press secretary for HRC from 2016-2021.

Monday’s post was not the first time in which Greene has, without evidence, accused LGBTQ people and allies of child sexual abuse or grooming, often for their support of age-appropriate classroom instruction on matters of LGBTQ history, sexual orientation, and gender identity.

She is not alone. As culture wars over issues of sexual orientation and gender identity have intensified in recent years, conservatives have increasingly used false allegations of pedophilia, bringing back a smear that was historically used against gay, queer, and trans people but until recently was considered out of bounds in mainstream political discourse.

RAINN, a national anti-sexual violence group, has highlighted the ways in which these baseless allegations are harmful not just to LGBTQ people but also to children, because they can diminish the experience of survivors and steal the focus away from real cases of child sexual abuse.

After her election to Congress in November, Greene and other House Republicans like U.S. Rep. Nancy Mace of South Carolina began attacking McBride, personally — proposing rules to prohibit her from using women’s restrooms in the Capitol and deliberately dead-naming and misgendering her.

By contrast, McBride last week introduced bipartisan legislation with GOP U.S. Rep. Young Kim (Calif.) to protect consumers from fraudulent scams that offer false promises to repair poor credit scores, becoming the first first-year member to introduce a bill designed to help American families.

The Washington Blade has reached out to representatives from HRC, McBride’s office, and the Congressional Equality Caucus for comment on Greene’s post.