,,ii ,calendar ,no4 #cjh #aacth         
,,congress  #b;d ,session  ,s4 #bjbd    
,,in ,,the ,,senate ,,of ,,the ,,united 
,,states  ,february #ab1 #bjad,mr4 ,cruz
 7for himself1 ,mr4 ,lee1 ,mr4 ,vitter1 
and ,mr4 ,roberts7 introduced the       
following bill2 which was read the first
 time  ,february #bd1 #bjad,read the    
second time and placed on the calendar  
,a ,,bill  ,to amend chapter #a of title
 #a1 ,united ,states ,code1 with regard 
to the definition of marriage and spouse
 for ,federal purposes and to ensure    
respect for ,state regulation of        
marriage4  #a4 ,short title ,this ,act  
may be cited as the ,state ,marriage    
,defense ,act of #bjad4  #b4 ,findings  
,congress finds the following3 7#a7     
,congress affirms the ,states'          
legitimate and proper public policy     
interests in regulating domestic        
relations and in defining marriage for  
the residents of their ,states4  7#b7   
,despite striking down section #c of the
 ,defense of ,marriage ,act1 the        

,supreme ,court ruling in ,united       
,states v4 ,windsor1 #acc ,s4 ,ct4 #bfge
 7#bjac7 did not institute a new        
,federal definition of marriage that    
includes same sex marriage4 ,instead1   
,united ,states v4 ,windsor specifically
 required the ,federal ,government to   
defer to state sovereign choices about  
who may be married in determining       
marital status for ,federal purposes4   
7#c7 ,united ,states v4 ,windsor        
reaffirmed that the historic and        
essential authority to define the       
marital relation rests with the ,states 
and criticized ,federal actions that put
 a thumb on the scales and influence a  
state's decision as to how to shape its 
own marriage laws4  7#d7 ,congress      
recognizes that current actions by the  
,federal ,government to afford benefits 
to certain relationships not recognized 
as marriages by a person's ,state of    
residence go beyond the ,supreme        
,court's ruling in ,united ,states v4   
,windsor4 ,these ,federal actions create

 two contradictory marriage regimes     
within the same ,state1 in direct       
contradiction of ,united ,states v4     
,windsor4  7#e7 ,actions taken by the   
,federal ,government to grant           
recognition of marital status for       
persons not recognized as married in    
their ,state of domicile undermine a    
,state's legitimate authority to define 
marriage for its residents4  #c4        
,amendment to definition of marriage for
 ,federal purposes ,section #g of title 
#a1 ,united ,states ,code1 is amended to
 read as follows3  #g4 ,definition of   
marriage and spouse ,for purposes of    
determining the meaning of any ,act of  
,congress1 or of any ruling1 regulation1
 or interpretation of the various       
administrative bureaus and agencies of  
the ,united ,states1 as applied with    
respect to individuals domiciled in a   
,state or in any other territory or     
possession of the ,united ,states1 the  
term marriage shall not include any     
relationship which that ,state1         

territory1 or possession does not       
recognize as a marriage1 and the term   
spouse shall not include an individual  
who is a party to a relationship that is
 not recognized as a marriage by that   
,state1 territory1 or possession4  4    
,february #bd1 #bjad,read the second    
time and placed on the calendar