The bans in question are on the state itself, recognizing such marriages. Unlike anti-miscegenation laws, there is no criminal sanction for those who enter a relationship that they consider marriage.

>No, they were struck down by the Supreme Court, and only in 2003!

Strictly speaking, that's a law against sodomy, not homosexuality. But I can agree that such laws can be construed as anti-homosexual, given that any sex practice between individuals of the same sex could fall under the sodomy category.

You're attempting some pretty fine hair splitting here.

Some, but not all anti-miscegenation laws banned interracial cohabitation and sex. In some states only attempting to get married was punishable. The same was true for same-sex marriage, which would've required lying on a form and thus perjury (which some states specifically made a felony: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/07/10/indian...).

As for sodomy laws, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodomy_laws_in_the_United_Stat... states "Three states specifically target their statutes at same-sex relations only: Kansas, Kentucky, and Texas" - and the ones that didn't certainly saw selective application preferentially targeting same-sex acts.

>Some, but not all anti-miscegenation laws banned interracial cohabitation and sex. In some states only attempting to get married was punishable. The same was true for same-sex marriage, which would've required lying on a form and thus perjury

There are no state laws that say 'homosexual marriage is a felony', while there were laws that said so with respect to interracial marriage. The criminalisation that you allege is happening, on the basis that there are laws against perjury combined with non-recognition of same-sex marriage, is not the same as the direct criminalisation of interracial marriage.