Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) confronted her Republican colleague Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) on Wednesday for saying it was a “silly waste of time” to vote on a bill that protected rights to same-sex marriage, she told CNN the next day.
Rubio made the comment inside earshot of Baldwin, the primary openly gay politician elected to the U.S. Senate. The Senate may take up a bill to codify same-sex marriage protections, which could possibly be under threat by the conservative Supreme Court that recently overturned the correct to an abortion.
The 2 senators then rode the elevator together, where Baldwin explained to Rubio how unsuitable he was.
“You most likely would have loved to be on the elevator to see the exchange after,” Baldwin told CNN of her encounter with Rubio.
“I said that, ‘The recent Supreme Court decision eroded a constitutional right to privacy. There’s an entire bunch of cases which were decided based on a constitutional right to privacy which are in jeopardy,’ which he disagrees with,” she continued. “And in any case, I said we’ll be talking some more.”
While Baldwin kept Rubio’s private response secret, she said she was “counting” votes for when the bill eventually heads to the Senate floor. She predicted Democrats would have 10 Republican votes so as to overcome a filibuster and pass the laws.
Rubio’s office didn’t immediately reply to a request for comment on the conversation.
Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) predicted the Senate has the votes to pass a bill protecting same-sex marriage rights.
Anna Moneymaker via Getty Images
The House of Representatives successfully voted to pass the Respect for Marriage Act, which might protect same-sex marriage, on July 19 with a vote of 267 to 157. Every Democrat voted in favor of the bill, together with 47 of the chamber’s 211 Republicans.
It should should be passed by the Senate so as to grow to be law, nonetheless, and comes at a busy time, with an August recess occurring in lower than two weeks.
Many Republicans, Rubio included, have insisted there is no such thing as a threat to same-sex marriage and that voting to guard it’s unnecessary. Justice Samuel Alito’s majority Supreme Court opinion overturning Roe v. Wade stated that other rulings regarding the correct to privacy, equivalent to same-sex marriage, wouldn’t be affected by the reversal.
But one among Alito’s colleagues suggested otherwise. Justice Clarence Thomas stated in a concurrence to the abortion decision that other precedents including Obergefell v. Hodges — which legalized same-sex marriage nationwide — must be revisited.
Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said that he hopes to bring the bill to the ground and was “impressed by how much bipartisan support the bill got within the House,” in accordance with CNN.