South Carolina General Assembly ratified H.3063, enacting a constitutional same-sex marriage ban
On March 22, 2007, the South Carolina General Assembly ratified H.3063 (Act No. 7), formally enacting into the state constitution the amendment providing that marriage between one man and one woman is the only lawful domestic union the state or its political subdivisions may create or recognize. The act completed a process begun with the legislature's 2005 referral of the amendment (HJR3133/Joint Resolution 45) and South Carolina voters' November 7, 2006 approval of it (77.97%-22.03%); no governor's signature was required for the ratification act.
Actors
On March 22, 2007, the South Carolina General Assembly ratified H.3063 (A7, R10), "AN ACT TO RATIFY AN AMENDMENT TO ARTICLE XVII OF THE CONSTITUTION OF SOUTH CAROLINA...SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT MARRIAGE BETWEEN ONE MAN AND ONE WOMAN IS THE ONLY LAWFUL DOMESTIC UNION THAT IS VALID OR RECOGNIZED IN THIS STATE," completing the enactment of the amendment into the state constitution as Article XVII, Section 15. The House passed the bill 92-7 on second reading January 25, 2007 and gave third-reading approval January 30; the Senate approved it on third reading and enrolled it February 27, 2007. As a constitutional ratification act, it required no governor's signature.
H.3063 was the final step in a three-stage process: the General Assembly first referred the amendment to the ballot in 2005 (HJR3133/Joint Resolution 45 of 2005), South Carolina voters approved it as Amendment 1 on November 7, 2006 by a 77.97%-22.03% margin, and H.3063 then ratified the approved amendment into the constitution. The enacted text provides that "a marriage between one man and one woman is the only lawful domestic union" the state will recognize, and bars the state and its political subdivisions from recognizing a domestic union created by another jurisdiction.
Updates
2014-11-18 — U.S. District Court ruled South Carolina could not deny recognition of out-of-state same-sex marriages [4]
Judge J. Michelle Childs of the U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina ruled in Bradacs v. Haley (No. 3:2013cv02351) that South Carolina's refusal to recognize valid out-of-state same-sex marriages violated the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment, issuing a permanent injunction against enforcement of that refusal. The Fourth Circuit declined to stay the ruling; South Carolina began issuing same-sex marriage licenses to in-state couples in November 2014, rendering Article XVII, Section 15 effectively inoperative before Obergefell.
2015-06-26 — Supreme Court's Obergefell v. Hodges ruling established a nationwide constitutional right to marry [5]
The U.S. Supreme Court held in Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U.S. 644, that the Fourteenth Amendment requires states to license and recognize same-sex marriages. The ruling superseded Article XVII, Section 15 of the South Carolina Constitution; it has not been enforced since but remains in the constitutional text.
2026-04-02 — South Carolina General Assembly introduced H.5501 calling for Supreme Court to overturn Obergefell [6]
South Carolina House Republicans introduced H.5501, a concurrent resolution formally rejecting Obergefell v. Hodges and urging the U.S. Supreme Court to reverse it and restore state authority to define marriage. The resolution references South Carolina voters' 2006 constitutional amendment and calls for the issue of marriage to be returned to individual states. A copy is to be sent to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Why we recorded this
Equal protection under the law requires that a state's constitution not be used to permanently foreclose legal recognition of a group of its residents' relationships. Here, the South Carolina General Assembly ratified a constitutional amendment declaring marriage between one man and one woman the only lawful domestic union the state may recognize, and barring the state from recognizing any other domestic union created by another jurisdiction. This archive records when a legislature completes the enactment of a constitutional provision that denies a class of people legal recognition of their relationships.
Sources
- 2007-2008 Bill 3063: Marriage — South Carolina Legislature primary accessed July 20, 2026
- South Carolina Amendment 1, Definition of Marriage and Prohibition of Domestic Unions Amendment (2006) — Ballotpedia secondary accessed July 20, 2026
- 2006 South Carolina Amendment 1 — Wikipedia secondary accessed July 20, 2026
- Bradacs v. Haley, No. 3:2013cv02351 (D.S.C. Nov. 18, 2014) — U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina primary accessed July 23, 2026
- Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U.S. 644 (2015) — U.S. Supreme Court primary accessed July 23, 2026
- H.5501 (2025-2026): Concurrent Resolution Calling for Reversal of Obergefell v. Hodges — South Carolina Legislature primary accessed July 23, 2026
See also
- Utah Gov. Huntsman signed Student Clubs Act requiring parental consent to join school clubs; sponsor said it targets gay-straight alliances
- Utah Gov. Huntsman signed HB 343, codifying married-couple preference that excluded same-sex couples from adoption and foster placement
- South Carolina Gov. McMaster signed H4608, barring transgender athletes from school sports teams
- South Carolina Gov. McMaster signed medical-conscience law shielding only race from care-refusal discrimination
- South Carolina enacted FY2022-23 budget Proviso 23.4, barring MUSC from using state funds for gender-affirming care for transgender minors under 16
Receive the daily digest by email
One email each morning with every entry filed the day before. Free. No tracking, no ads. Unsubscribe anytime.
