Bill C-38 · 38th Parliament · Paul Martin
Civil Marriage Act
An Act respecting certain aspects of legal capacity for marriage for civil purposes
Government bill. Became law.
- IntroducedFeb. 1, 2005
- Debated in principleMay 4, 2005
- Studied by a committeeDone
- Passed its first chamberJune 28, 2005
- Passed the second chamberJuly 18, 2005
- Became lawJuly 20, 2005
Leading supporters
Ranked by the part each played: who is responsible for the bill, who carried it, and who spoke for it most.
- Paul MartinPrime Minister
Who carries this bill
Arrows run from the person responsible to those who answer to them on this bill. The critic leads the Senate’s scrutiny and answers to no one on it.
Where members stand
Votes and debate for this bill have not been read yet.
How it changed on the way
75% of the text as introduced was changed or removed by the time it became law (3,349 words introduced, 2,033 passed). A committee amended it.
substantial changeintent mostly kept
The core purpose of extending civil marriage to same-sex couples stayed intact, but Parliament added explicit protections for religious officials, conscience, and charities. Three new clauses and one preamble sentence were inserted while some technical definitions and explanatory notes were dropped or reworded.
- New clause added to shield registered charities from penalties for beliefs on marriage.
After: “sections (6.1) and (6.2), a registered charity with stated purposes that include the advancement of religion shall not have its registration revoked or be subject to any other penalty under Part V solely because it or any of its members, officials, supporters or adherents exercises, in relation to marriage between persons of the same sex, the freedom of conscience and religion guaranteed under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.”
- Preamble sentence added stating diverse views on marriage are not against the public interest.
After: “WHEREAS it is not against the public interest to hold and publicly express diverse views on marriage;”
How precisely it is written
mostly preciseChallenging the law: HardDisputing a charge: Hard
The Act sets objective definitions and rules for marriage capacity and related tax and benefits provisions without subjective standards or open-ended discretion. Religious protections use narrow 'solely because' language tied directly to Charter guarantees rather than broad policy tests.
Open to argument
“solely because it or any of its members, officials, supporters or adherents exercises, in relation to marriage between persons of the same sex, the freedom of conscience and religion guaranteed under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms”
Ties the protection to an interpretive Charter right, which could require case-by-case argument over what conduct qualifies.
Clear-cut
“Marriage, for civil purposes, is the lawful union of two persons to the exclusion of all others.”
Uses a single, objective definition with no qualifiers or discretion.“"spouse" means either of two persons who are married to each other;”
Provides a closed, numerical definition that settles eligibility immediately.
Discretion. The statute leaves no grants of power or interpretive discretion to ministers, officials or regulations; all changes are enacted directly.
Challenging the law itself. A direct challenge would be difficult because the Act implements section 15 equality rights while expressly preserving section 2 freedoms of conscience and religion.
Disputing a charge under it. Disputing a breach would be difficult because the operative clauses rely on clear factual tests such as 'solely by reason of' and defined terms like 'legal parent'.
Read by a language model from the royal assent text; every quoted phrase appears in the bill. A reading of the drafting, not legal advice.
Did it work?
effective
The Civil Marriage Act directly achieved its purpose by codifying marriage as the union of two persons and extending legal capacity to same-sex couples nationwide, with the change remaining in force without reversal or successful core challenges since 2005. Limited peer-reviewed research indicates positive relational impacts for affected couples, consistent with the Act's equality objectives under the Charter.
- MacIntosh, H., Reissing, E. D., & Andruff, H. (2010). Same-sex marriage in Canada: The impact of legal marriage on the first cohort of gay and lesbian Canadians to wed. Canadian Journal of Human SexualitystudyQuantitative and qualitative analysis of early same-sex married couples showed significantly higher relationship satisfaction and lower attachment anxiety/avoidance compared to heterosexual norms, with marriage affecting them positively relationally, politically, and socially.
- Reference re Same-Sex Marriage, 2004 SCC 79courtPre-enactment Supreme Court reference confirmed Parliament's jurisdiction over the definition of civil marriage capacity and that extending it to same-sex couples was consistent with the Charter.
Who lobbied on it
No lobbying registration naming this bill is loaded.
Stages and dates from LEGISinfo.