WASHINGTON — Win or lose, if Republicans in the U.S. House vote later today on a constitutional amendment defining marriage as between a man and a woman, it will send political messages to at least three different audiences: conservative voters, Democrats and the judiciary.

Especially the judiciary. Everywhere on Capitol Hill these days, lawmakers from Utah and elsewhere are taking shots at judges they say are making law, not interpreting it.

"What America's founders intended to be the least dangerous branch has become the powerful, and liberty itself is at stake," Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, told the Christian Coalition's Road to Victory 2004 conference recently.

"The timing (of the Marriage Protection Amendment) has been foisted upon us by judicial activists and their runaway courts," insisted House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas, during a press conference earlier this week.

With a presidential election scarcely a month away, those are the kind of fire-and-brimstone stump speeches intended to rally conservatives, especially religious conservatives, and further define the differences between Democratic nominee John Kerry, who believes the issue should be left up to the states, and President Bush, who supports a constitutional amendment.

House Republicans are still piqued that Senate Republicans could not muster the votes earlier this year to pass a constitutional measure, and the House would love "to give it back to the Senate to do another vote," said Rep. Rob Bishop, R-Utah.

Democrats in close races will be put on the spot, too, Bishop said, calling it a "natural outgrowth" of Washingtonian politics. If they vote against the amendment, it could hurt re-election chances in some districts; if they vote for it, they defy a loyal Democratic constituency, not to mention party leadership.

DeLay makes no secret about the political motives behind today's debate.

"The American people need to know where their representatives stand," he said. "It will be part of, and should be part of, the debate and the elections that are upcoming."

It should not be a wedge issue in Utah's tightly contested 2nd Congressional District.

Rep. Jim Matheson, the only Democrat in the Utah delegation, has said from the beginning he supported the amendment, even though he paid a price with Utah gays and lesbians, who protested against Matheson at the state convention by turning their backs on him during his speech.

"I have always defined marriage as between a man and a woman," he said Wednesday. "Recent court cases that could redefine marriage have renewed the debate over this issue. I believe this federal amendment is the best option available to Congress to uphold traditional marriage."