I support this bill, people should be able to marry whoever they choose.
CACR25
House · 2026 sessionDemocraticKilled in HouseConstitutional right to marry
AIProposes a state constitutional amendment establishing marriage as a fundamental civil right and requiring the state to recognize and protect every individual's right to marry and have their marriage legally recognized regardless of sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, or race, subject to voter approval in November 2026.
relative to the right to marry. Providing that the right to marry is a fundamental civil right and that the state shall protect the right of every individual, regardless of sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, or race, to marry and to have their marriage legally recognized.
Status
Killed in the House — Inexpedient to Legislate · March 13, 2026- ✓Introduced
- ✕House
- Senate
- On the ballot
Division of testimony
638 submissionsArgument digest · AI-generated
from 226 of 226 written submissionsCACR25 would amend the New Hampshire Constitution to declare marriage a fundamental civil right and require the state to protect every individual's right to marry and have that marriage legally recognized, regardless of sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, or race. Testimony was overwhelmingly supportive, with submitters framing the amendment as a necessary safeguard against possible federal rollback of marriage equality; the small amount of opposing testimony reflected either a libertarian objection to state involvement in marriage licensing or apparent confusion about what the bill does.
- Marriage is a fundamental civil rightSupport134 of 226 reviewed
Submitters describe marriage as a basic civil right that New Hampshire should guarantee to every resident regardless of sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, or race, and argue this principle belongs in the state constitution.
“The right to marry is a fundamental civil right and that the state shall protect the right of every individual, regardless of sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, or race, to marry and to have their marriage legally recognized.”
— Sharon Racusin, Hanover · #549586 — read full submission →
“I strongly believe marriage is a fundamental civil right and deserves to be enshrined in our state constitution, providing marriage equality for all.”
— Angela Brown, Randolph · #540768 — read full submission →
- Statutory protection is not enough given federal riskSupport23 of 226 reviewed
Submitters argue that current statutory marriage equality is vulnerable because the U.S. Supreme Court could overturn Obergefell v. Hodges, pointing to the reversal of Roe v. Wade and Justice Thomas's concurrence in Dobbs as evidence that federal precedent cannot be relied on.
“The US Supreme Court has shown a proclivity to throw out court precedents, such as when they overruled Roe v. Wade. In fact, in his concurring decision in that case, Justice Thomas called for the reconsideration of the Obergefell case”
— Phil Hatcher, Dover · #542100 — read full submission →
“We're already seeing challenges to Obergefell, which protects marriage equality at the federal level. We know that people who want to remove these protections will continue to challenge this issue at every level”
— Sophie Merrow, Portsmouth · #549702 — read full submission →
- Consistent with "Live Free or Die" and NH's historySupport36 of 226 reviewed
Submitters tie the amendment to New Hampshire's state motto and its history as the first state to enact marriage equality through the legislature rather than the courts, arguing the state should continue leading on individual liberty.
- Personal and family stakes in legal recognitionSupport14 of 226 reviewed
Many submitters describe their own marriages, partners, or relatives and explain what is at stake if legal recognition were lost, including hospital visitation, inheritance, custody, and tax treatment.
“I have been married to my wife for 7 years. 12 months ago, we took on full time caregiver roles for my cousin's children (ages 12 and 15) after my cousin and his wife both died in 2020”
— Emma Simpson-Tucker, Dover · #549642 — read full submission →
“I am a husband in an interracial marriage, and I know firsthand that marriage is not an abstract political idea, it is a lived reality built on love, commitment, family, and mutual responsibility.”
— Daniel Tracy, Dover · #551813 — read full submission →
- Government and religion should not dictate marriageSupport15 of 226 reviewed
Submitters argue that marriage between consenting adults is a private matter and that religious objections or government preference should not determine who may marry, invoking separation of church and state.
“Enforce the separation of Church and State. Churches aren't required to marry gay couples - that's their freedom.”
— Laura LaValley, Meredith · #550357 — read full submission →
“Freedom to marry another adult of your choosing is a basic civil right that harms no one.”
— Lynn Lippitt, MILFORD · #552438 — read full submission →
- Protection should explicitly cover interracial marriageSupport12 of 226 reviewed
Submitters note the amendment protects interracial as well as same-sex marriage, drawing a parallel to the historical injustice of bans on interracial marriage.
“Remember when inter-racial marriages were taboo? This is the exact same concept.”
— Laura LaValley, Meredith · #550357 — read full submission →
“it says that every person, regardless of race, sex, gender identity, or sexual orientation, has the same right to form a family and have that family recognized and protected by the law”
— Daniel Tracy, Dover · #551813 — read full submission →
- Extending marriage rights does not harm existing marriagesSupport5 of 226 reviewed
Submitters argue that allowing others to marry takes nothing away from anyone else's marriage and causes no harm.
“As a straight woman married for 57 years, no one else's marriage threatens mine. Everyone - straight, gay, transgender, Black, white, etc. - should have the same marriage rights as I do.”
— Nancy Brennan, Weare · #544418 — read full submission →
“When are we going to learn that when we give someone else basic human rights, it doesn't lessen yours? It's not pie.”
— Mark Fortin, Nottingham · #552986 — read full submission →
- Broad, bipartisan public support makes this common senseSupport5 of 226 reviewed
Submitters point to polling showing large majority support for marriage equality among NH residents and describe the amendment as a non-controversial, bipartisan measure.
“this bill is something we should all be able to support on a bi-partisan basis. The large majority of citizens across the United States support marriage equality.”
— Sara Tirrell, Plymouth · #539891 — read full submission →
“Even though 80% of Granite Staters support this bill, we could find ourselves facing devastating consequences if Obergefell is overturned.”
— Sophie Merrow, Portsmouth · #549702 — read full submission →
- Codification prevents cross-state legal chaosSupport1 of 226 reviewed
One submitter argues that clear constitutional recognition prevents legal confusion if a marriage performed elsewhere is suddenly not recognized in New Hampshire, including the risk of an unintended bigamous marriage.
- Government should not license marriage at allOppose1 of 226 reviewed
One submitter opposes the bill from a libertarian position, arguing government should not be involved in marriage at all and that marriage licensing should be eliminated entirely rather than expanded.
- Testimony opposing the bill while describing support for its aimsOppose1 of 226 reviewed
One submission labeled as opposition argues against restricting gay and interracial marriage, language that is consistent with the bill's stated purpose rather than opposed to it, suggesting possible confusion about what the bill does.
Generated by claude-sonnet-5 (claude code agent) on Jul 20, 2026. Quotes are verbatim excerpts, verified against the cited submission before publication. Summaries are AI interpretation of the record, not part of it.
When are we going to learn that when we give someone else basic human rights, it doesn't lessen yours? It's not pie. If you don't want to get "gay" married, the next time a gay person proposes to you, say no.
All NH citizens should be free to marry who they choose. I encourage you to preserve marriage equality for all NH residents.
We need to protect the rights of EVERY citizen of NH, not just the ones who look, talk, or love like us. Making marriage equality part of our Constitution does not remove rights from heterosexual marriages, it just protects the rights of others. If you say are for freedom, but that doesn't apply to everyone, you are not for freedom, you are for protecting your privilege.
I fully support marriage between two consenting adults, no matter their gender. Everyone deserves the right to love who they wish and have their relationship sanctioned in marriage by the state and federal governments. This provides rights to inherit, pay taxes as a couple, and make medical decisions if one person is incapacitated. I fully support this bill. Thank you,
I'm a married, gay constituent among many others in town. If you truly represent me, you'll acknowledge that I'm a consenting adult who can be in a relationship with any other consenting adult I choose. If not, then you obviously don't represent me, and I'll be happy to support others in future. Thanks.
Adults should be able to marry other adults.
I support explicitly protecting marriage equality in the New Hampshire Constitution because it affirms a simple principle: all families deserve equal dignity, legal protection, and stability under the law. Marriage is not just a personal or religious institution—it is a civil contract that carries over 1,000 legal rights and responsibilities related to healthcare decision-making, inheritance, taxation, parenting, and end-of-life care. When access to those protections depends on who you love, the state is failing its obligation to treat citizens equally. From a health and community perspective, stable, legally recognized relationships matter. Decades of research show that legal recognition of relationships is associated with better mental health, reduced stress, and stronger social support—factors that directly influence health outcomes. Removing or weakening marriage protections introduces uncertainty and harm, not just for couples but for their children and extended families. Putting marriage equality in the Constitution matters because statutory rights can be reversed. Constitutional protection provides stability across political cycles and ensures that fundamental civil rights are not subject to shifting majorities. This is not about special rights. It is about equal protection, equal responsibility, and equal recognition under the law. In New Hampshire, where we value individual liberty and limited government interference, protecting marriage equality is consistent with our deepest traditions: the government should not decide which families are worthy of legal protection.
let's get this protected and move on with our happily married lives
Adults should absolutely be guaranteed to Roth to marry other consenting adults as they please. Marriage isn’t about the morals of others it is about a union between two people legally entered within our state.
CACR 25 protects the freedom to marry by placing marriage equality directly in the New Hampshire Constitution. Constitutional rights should not depend on political shifts or court changes. This resolution ensures equal treatment and lasting protection for all families. I urge the committee to recommend Ought to Pass.
You absolutely need to support this bill. These are fundamental rights and need to be enshrined into New Hampshire law. Protect our LGBTQ residents, stop attacking them.
New Hampshire is a state that respects the autonomy people have for how they live their lives. This concept should pertain to marriage as well.
Everyone in NH deserves to know they will always have the right to marry. Can't think of any reason why someone wouldn't support this!
In the "live free" state everyone should have the right to marriage regardless of race, gender, religion, political affiliation. This right should be protected by our state constitution.
I believe that everyone should have the right to marriage regardless of race, gender, religion, or political affiliation especially in the live free state.
YES! In a world where case law becomes more and more prevalent, the State of New Hampshire needs to absolutely adopt these kinds of amendments so that we remain a safe, inclusive place to live, not leaving important rights issues up to case law.
I support this bill.
We have already witnessed reproductive rights being terminated. We have witnessed the people lobbying for that termination regret their choices for the impact it left. We cannot let that happen again. I shouldn’t have to explain the positive impacts there are for recognizing happy marriages. I shouldn’t have to explain that we can see how our rights can be protected when a state constitution explicitly states what the nation will not. I don’t have to explain the honor, privilege, and gravity of being first at something. I personally believe it’s a shame that New Hampshire has the motto Live Free or Die and we don’t strive to reflect that. Protect our right to live freely.
I support this bill.
I am a bisexual, asian woman, engaged to a white man, and I have numerous friends and family living in NH that are queer or mixed race. It feels like everyday we lose more rights and freedoms, so I am strongly in support of this bill to protect the right to marriage equality in the NH constitution. If not for myself, then for all of my loved ones.
Dear Committee Members, I strongly support CACR25 because it establishes marriage as a fundamental civil right for New Hampshire's citizens. Freedom to marry another adult of your choosing is a basic civil right that harms no one. Yet I have friends whose lives will be negatively impacted if the Supreme Court reverses their Obergefell ruling and their marriages are invalidated. Marriage carries responsibilities of care for another and gives the priveledges of being considered family when a loved one is hospitalized or passes away. Marriage is a civil institution that the government approves to convey special advantages, including tax advantages. These advantages should not be denied to adults in a committed relationship because a minority of religious people object. I urge you to vote yes to pass CACR25. Sincerely, Lynn Lippitt
The right to marry is critical for ALL consenting couples.
I support marriage equality. Love is love. Government should not be allowed to tell consenting adults who they are allowed to marry.
I support this bill. We are all children of god and god loves and values each one of us equally.