Same-sex marriage apparently remains a controversial enough subject that U.S. Rep. Matt Cartwright was the only local congressman who consented to an interview this week to discuss the cases the Supreme Court heard Tuesday and Wednesday.
The rest either issued statements or did not respond at all.
As the only congressman who represents Northeast Pennsylvania in Washington to favor same-sex marriage, Mr. Cartwright, D-17, Moosic, said he was hoping for rulings expanding marriage.
"You have (former President) Bill Clinton, for crying out loud, who signed the Defense of Marriage Act into law now saying it should be overturned," Mr. Cartwright said.
Mr. Cartwright has even signed onto a friend-of-the-court brief backing the same-sex-marriage argument in the Wednesday case seeking to undo part of the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act that defines marriage as between a man and a woman.
Neither Reps. Lou Barletta, R-11, Hazleton, and Tom Marino, R-10, Lycoming Twp., nor Sens. Bob Casey, a Democrat, and Pat Toomey, a Republican, signed onto the brief. The 172 signers - 132 House members and 40 senators - were all Democrats. Friend-of-the-court briefs allow groups or individuals to express their opinions and legal arguments on a case to a court without getting directly involved in formal arguments on one side or another.
Mr. Cartwright said he never had a well-defined position on same-sex marriage until last year when he was running for office. After Vice President Joseph Biden, then President Barack Obama came out in favor of same-sex marriage, he thought more about the issue over the summer and decided they were right.
"LGBT (lesbian-gay-bisexual-transgender) people are not a threat to anybody, and it's time we stopped singling them out for discrimination," he said.
He is not "in favor of forcing any religious group, any church, any temple, any mosque ... to perform ceremonies that they object to," he said.
Spokesmen for Mr. Casey and Mr. Barletta issued statements on their behalf, but declined to make them available for interviews.
"In the past, Sen. Casey has supported civil unions and he is closely following the debate around DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act). He intends to thoroughly review any legislation on this when it comes before the Senate," said John Rizzo, a Casey spokesman, in a statement.
"Obviously this is a case that the Supreme Court is now considering, but I have long-standing views about marriage," Mr. Barletta said in a statement. "In my view, marriage is and ought to be between one man and one woman. Beyond that, anyone is free to enter legal contracts with another individual."
Neither statement addressed the central issues in the two cases heard by the Supreme Court.
The Wednesday case that included the brief Mr. Cartwright signed centered on a woman being forced to pay more than $363,000 in estate taxes after inheriting her partner's estate because the federal government is forbidden from recognizing same-sex marriages. In a heterosexual marriage, a surviving spouse simply inherits without being required to pay the estate tax.
The Tuesday case centered on whether a voter-approved California ballot question that outlawed same-sex marriage should stand.
Mr. Toomey's spokeswoman said he was unavailable for comment and did not issue a statement.
As a House member in 2004, Mr. Toomey voted in favor of a constitutional amendment defining marriage as being strictly between a man and a woman. During his 2010 election campaign, Mr. Toomey restated that position on his website, saying that "marriage is sacred and is best defined as between a man and a woman."
A spokeswoman for Mr. Marino, who supports a constitutional amendment to prevent same-sex marriage, did not respond to emails about his position on the Supreme Court cases.
Contact the writer: bkrawczeniuk@timesshamrock.com