Michigan House Bill HJRF

Michigan 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/5/25
• Refer: 3/5/25

Caption

Civil rights: sexual orientation discrimination; certain references to marriage; make gender neutral. Amends sec. 1, art. X & repeals sec. 25, art. I of the state constitution.

Summary

House Joint Resolution F proposes a constitutional amendment to make certain marriage and property provisions in the Michigan Constitution gender-neutral. It would amend Article X, Section 1 to replace references to “woman” and “husband” with gender-neutral terms such as “individual” and “spouse,” while preserving the rule that a person’s separate property acquired before or after marriage remains that person’s property and is not liable for the other spouse’s debts. The resolution also repeals Article I, Section 25, which currently defines marriage in the constitution as the union of one man and one woman and limits recognition of similar unions. If adopted by the Legislature and approved by voters, the resolution would remove constitutional language that treats marriage and property rights through a gender-specific lens. The measure is framed as a civil rights and sexual orientation discrimination issue in the bill caption, and it would affect the state constitution rather than ordinary statutes. Because it is a constitutional amendment, it would not itself change all related laws immediately, but it would eliminate the cited constitutional provisions and allow state law to operate without those gender-based limitations.

Impact

The bill would amend the Michigan Constitution by revising Article X, Section 1 to use gender-neutral language in the coverture/property provision and by repealing Article I, Section 25, the constitutional marriage definition limiting marriage to one man and one woman. Its direct legal effect would be to remove those constitutional restrictions and replace them with neutral terminology, affecting how marriage and spousal property rights are described in the state constitution. Any related statutory or policy changes would depend on future legislation or implementation following voter approval.

Sentiment

Based on the bill caption and the absence of recorded committee testimony or votes in the provided material, the measure appears to be presented as a civil rights modernization proposal aimed at removing gender-specific constitutional language. The available context suggests support for gender-neutral treatment of marriage and property rights, but there is no documented vote history or transcript evidence here to show the level of support or opposition. Overall, the bill is framed in a reform-oriented way rather than as a technical cleanup measure alone.

Contention

The main point of contention is the repeal of the constitutional marriage definition limiting marriage to one man and one woman, which directly implicates sexual orientation and marriage recognition policy. Supporters would likely view the change as eliminating discriminatory or outdated language, while opponents could object to removing the existing constitutional marriage definition. A secondary issue is the broader symbolic and legal effect of changing long-standing constitutional language on marriage and property rights, even though the property provision itself is largely a gender-neutral drafting update.