Isle residents who were around some 30 years ago would remember just how combative the same-sex fight in Hawaii was. The state was in the vanguard of the marriage equality movement, with the Hawaii Supreme Court ruling in 1993 that restricting marriage to heterosexual couples amounted to an unconstitutional case of sex discrimination.

Baehr v. Lewin was a landmark case, but it turned out to need reinforcement. Even now, it’s clear that the state Legislature, and then the voters, should act to underscore that marriage equality is a right, and not make it easy for lawmakers of the future to take it away.

That should start by passing House Bill 2802, which would place an amendment on the 2024 election ballot to insulate that state position.

In Baehr, the court ruled that, unless the state could show a compelling interest in restricting marriage, a same-sex ban would not pass muster. A lower court found no such interest.

Efforts at the state Capitol to put such a ban in the Constitution failed, but the campaign took its toll: A number of those who opposed the ban lost their seats in the subsequent election.

Ultimately, recalled Dan Foley on Monday, the political pressure was on to get the issue addressed in a constitutional amendment. Foley, who retired as associate justice on the Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals, at the time was the plaintiffs’ attorney on the Baehr case. He said he came up with the wording that’s now in the Section 23 of the Hawaii Constitution to “soften the blow”:

“The Legislature shall have the power to reserve marriage to opposite-sex couples.”

The thinking was that those words would not by themselves put the ban in the Constitution, Foley said, and would require legislation.

There was legislation solidifying the position favoring heterosexual marriage — but that was reversed in 2013 with the Hawaii Marriage Equality Act. And with the U.S. Supreme Court’s Obergefell v. Hodges ruling in 2015, marriage equality reached all 50 states.

However, loopholes remain today that must be closed. The House Committee on Judiciary and Hawaiian Affairs has advanced HB 2802, which would delete Section 23.

The impetus for this bill arose after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the right to abortion established in Roe v. Wade. The concern now is that the justices will reverse the high court’s 2015 finding on marriage equality as well, according to the committee report on HB 2802, and if they do, Section 23 will allow state lawmakers to limit marriage, too.

That section should be excised. Assuming it is, Foley said, there is enough of a bar against sex discrimination in the state Constitution to protect same-sex marriage.

The testimony on the bill was heavily, but not uniformly, in favor of the amendment. Most of the opponents simply registered their position against the bill without explanation, but some posited that lawmakers should focus on measures that would benefit families and children.

Their arguments miss the mark. Cornell University is one of numerous institutions that have reviewed scholarly studies, and overwhelmingly, its conclusion was that children of same-sex couples fare no worse than those in opposite-sex families (808ne.ws/samesex). There’s no compelling state interest evident for a ban.

Supporters of HB 2802 span government, business and labor groups. One statement, from the Hawaii State AFL-CIO, is persuasive: “It’s imperative to recognize that denying marriage equality not only perpetuates discrimination but also undermines the principles of justice and fairness that our society should uphold.”

That’s the takeaway message for lawmakers, and for voters once this amendment lands on the ballot.