#1 Occurred by a 1 vote margin. Do you realize how close that was?
#2 Occurred because (H. R. 3893) wasn't law.
The purpose of (H. R. 3893) is to confine errors to the States in which they occur and let the citizens of those states rectify the problem in accordance with their respective legislative, and judicial remedies.
The error of Dale vs. BSA would be confined to N.J.
Lawrence v. Texas would have never made it to SCOTUS and nothing would have changed in those states with sodomy laws.
Why, yes. Yes, I do. A one vote margin is, remarkably, a margin of one vote. Thank you for pointing that out. I might have missed it otherwise.
The error of Dale vs. BSA would be confined to N.J.
Actually, probably not. There were suits pending in numerous other states that the June 2000 Dale vs. BSA decision short-circuited. I well imagine that at least some of them (notably California) would have come down against the BSA, and the precendent in each state would have hurt many other organizations that don't have the BSA's resources to fight lawsuits. Here in Illinois, a gay man tried to force the BSA to hire him as a policy-making and -enforcing executive. He succeeded in defeating the Chicago Area Council, BSA, at the local and circuit court level (based on a Chicago city anti-discrimination ordinance). He was defeated at the appellate level, but the judge there cited not Illinois law but Dale vs. BSA as the deciding factor. Otherwise the BSA may well have been forced to hire gays and lesbians to enforce the BSA's requirement that avowed homosexuals not be allowed to serve as Scoutmasters, etc.