Same-sex marriage has been federally legal for over a decade. HJ3 isn't about legality — it's about putting Virginia's Constitution on one side of every future religious freedom case, permanently.
HJ3 would repeal the existing (already unenforceable) ban on same-sex marriage in Virginia's constitution, and replace it with this affirmative constitutional mandate:
"The Commonwealth shall not deny the issuance of a marriage license to two adults seeking a lawful marriage on the basis of the sex, gender, or race of such persons, and no licensed marriage in the Commonwealth shall be treated differently from any other licensed marriage on the basis of the sex, gender, or race of the parties to such marriage."
Virginia already has the Virginia Values Act (VVA), which prohibits discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity in employment, housing, and public accommodations. That law already carries severe financial penalties — and HJ3 would make it constitutionally harder for anyone to challenge those penalties in court.
The fines are from existing Virginia law. HJ3's effect is to write marriage equality into the constitution, which courts will use as additional constitutional basis when ruling on VVA enforcement cases — making it harder for faith-based businesses and organizations to defend themselves.
Under the Virginia Values Act + HJ3, the following people and organizations face heightened legal exposure for declining to participate in same-sex weddings or for operating consistently with a traditional definition of marriage:
Same-sex marriage has been federally legal since Obergefell v. Hodges (2015). No court can ban it regardless of what Virginia's constitution says. HJ3 isn't about making it legal — it's about using the state constitution as a constitutional weapon in religious freedom cases going forward.
When a faith-based business challenges the Virginia Values Act on religious freedom grounds, their opponent will cite HJ3. Having the Virginia Constitution explicitly require that same-sex marriages not be "treated differently" directly undermines the religious liberty argument that a business has a constitutional right to decline.
HJ3 contains no exemption for religious organizations, faith-based businesses, or individuals with sincerely held religious beliefs. The constitutional mandate — equal treatment of all licensed marriages — is absolute on its face. Any exemptions would have to come from litigation, not from the amendment itself.
Whatever you think about the policy, the question is whether this belongs in the Virginia Constitution permanently. If circumstances change — if courts interpret it broadly, if religious liberty jurisprudence shifts — Virginia will have no legislative recourse. This is locked in for generations.
"Same-sex marriage has been legal in Virginia since 2014, protected federally since 2015. HJ3 doesn't make it more or less legal. What it does is give courts a new constitutional argument to use against anyone who declines to participate — like a photographer, a florist, or a venue owner with a faith-based conviction."
"Under Virginia's existing law, declining to serve a same-sex wedding can result in fines of $50,000 for the first offense and $100,000 for every offense after that. HJ3 doesn't add those fines — they're already there. But HJ3 makes them harder to challenge in court by adding constitutional weight to the other side."
"Read the language. HJ3 says Virginia shall not allow licensed marriages to be treated differently based on sex or gender. There is no carve-out for religious organizations, faith-based businesses, or individuals with sincerely held beliefs. If you believe your faith matters in how you run your business, HJ3 is working against you — in the constitution itself."
"Wedding photographers and cake bakers across the country have spent years in federal court defending their right to decline — and that fight has been exhausting and expensive. HJ3 doesn't just make that fight harder in Virginia — it adds the state constitution to the other side of the argument. These aren't hypothetical cases. They're already happening."
"If you believe same-sex couples should be able to marry, great — they already can. You don't have to vote YES on HJ3 to protect that. What you ARE voting on is whether to use the constitution to shut down religious freedom defenses permanently. Those are two different questions."
Sign the petition at RiseUpNow.us. Share this page with your church, your neighbors, your community.