CACR 28 (2010): relating to the definition of marriage. Providing that the state shall only recognize the union of one man and one woman as marriage.

Cite this page

Granite Record indexes the General Court’s record; it is not that record. Where a citation allows only one source, cite the General Court — every page here links to what it is drawn from. The date below is the day the page was read.

MLA
“CACR 28 (2010): relating to the definition of marriage. Providing that the state shall only recognize the union of one man and one woman as marriage.” Granite Record, https://graniterecord.org/bill/2010/cacr28. Accessed 24 Oct. 2026.
APA
Granite Record. (n.d.). CACR 28 (2010): relating to the definition of marriage. Providing that the state shall only recognize the union of one man and one woman as marriage. Retrieved 24 Oct. 2026, from https://graniterecord.org/bill/2010/cacr28
Chicago
Granite Record. “CACR 28 (2010): relating to the definition of marriage. Providing that the state shall only recognize the union of one man and one woman as marriage.” Accessed 24 Oct. 2026. https://graniterecord.org/bill/2010/cacr28.
BibTeX
@misc{bill-2010-cacr28, title = {CACR 28 (2010): relating to the definition of marriage. Providing that the state shall only recognize the union of one man and one woman as marriage.}, howpublished = {Granite Record}, url = {https://graniterecord.org/bill/2010/cacr28}, note = {Accessed 24 Oct. 2026} }

CACR 28 (2010)

relating to the definition of marriage. Providing that the state shall only recognize the union of one man and one woman as marriage.

  • Status: Killed
  • Term: 2009-2010
  • House committee: Judiciary
  • Subject: Constitutional Amendments

The Story

It was introduced on January 6, 2010 and referred to the House Judiciary committee. The committee held a public hearing on January 20, 2010. The committee met in executive session on February 9, 2010 to vote on its recommendation. The majority recommended that the House kill it, and the minority recommended that the House pass it, by a vote of 12–8. On February 17, 2010 the House failed “Postpone Definitely to Mar 17 (Rep Bates)” on a roll call 148–191. On February 17, 2010 the House voted to kill it on a roll call 201–135. On February 17, 2010 the House failed “Reconsideration (Rep Eaton)” on a roll call 109–207.

Sponsors

Hearings and Sessions

  • January 20, 2010, 1:00 PM: public hearing, House Judiciary, LOB 206-208
  • February 9, 2010, 10:00 AM: executive session, House Judiciary, LOB 208

Votes

  • February 17, 2010, House: SPECIAL ORDER TO MAR 17 (REP BATES) — yeas 148, nays 191, failed
  • February 17, 2010, House: Inexpedient to Legislate — yeas 201, nays 135, passed
  • February 17, 2010, House: RECONSIDERATION (REP EATON) — yeas 109, nays 207, failed

The Docket

  • January 6, 2010: Introduced 1/6/2010 and Referred to Judiciary
  • January 20, 2010: Public Hearing: 1/20/2010 1:00 PM LOB 206-208
  • February 9, 2010: Executive Session: 2/9/2010 10:00 AM LOB 208
  • February 11, 2010: Majority Committee Report: Inexpedient to Legislate for Feb 17 RC (Vote 12-8)
  • February 11, 2010: Minority Committee Report: Ought to Pass
  • February 17, 2010: Postpone Definitely to Mar 17 (Rep Bates): MF RC 148-191
  • February 17, 2010: Inexpedient to Legislate: MA RC 201-135
  • February 17, 2010: Reconsideration (Rep Eaton): MF RC 109-207

Laws It Would Change

From the General Court