THE QUESTIONShould a provision be added to the Family Code providing that only a marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California? THE SITUATIONCurrent California law states that marriage arises from a civil contract between a man and a woman. California also recognizes a legal marriage from outside of the state as valid in California. For example, California recognizes marriages performed in Utah where the spouses are only required to be 14 years of age, although our age limit is higher. Presently, no states recognize marriages between people of the same sex. However, the U.S. Constitution requires all states to give full faith and credit to the laws and judicial proceedings of other states. California does recognize "domestic partners." In October 1999, a domestic partnership measure (AB 26) was signed into law, providing some limited rights to same-sex couples. The law established a statewide registry, and guarantees hospital visitation rights for same-sex couples and heterosexual couples at least 62 years old. In addition, public employees will have access to health insurance for their domestic partners. In 1996, the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) was signed into law. It declared that only a marriage between a man and a woman is recognized for federal purposes, and also allowed states to ignore each other's legal same-sex marriages. To date, 30 other states have passed laws to ban same-sex marriage or prohibit recognition of such marriages performed in other states. Proponents of state DOMA laws point to the federal act. Opponents, however, claim that DOMA laws are unconstitutional because they violate equal protection and interstate travel rights, as well as the full faith and credit clause of the Constitution. There have been many attempts in other states to either limit or broaden the scope of marriage, with varying results. In December 1999, the Vermont Supreme Court ruled that same-sex couples are entitled to the same benefits and protections as heterosexual wedded couples. In 1993, the Hawaii Supreme Court ruled that the state's denial of marriage licenses to same-sex couples might violate the state constitution's guarantee of equal protection. However, rulings in this case were nullified when voters passed a constitutional amendment to prevent same-sex marriages in 1998. THE PROPOSALThis initiative statute would provide that only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California. Marriages performed in other states and countries would not be legal in California if they did not meet this criterion. FISCAL EFFECTThe Legislative Analyst estimates that this measure would likely have no direct fiscal effect on state and local governments. SUPPORTERS SAY· Californians will continue to have the right to live as they choose, but not to re-define marriage for our entire society. · Without Proposition 22, legal loopholes could force California to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states. OPPONENTS SAY· Proposition 22 is unnecessary government interference. The measure does not ban same-sex marriages in California -- they are already banned by current law. · This measure is discriminatory and singles out one group for attack; this divides Californians instead of uniting us. For more information: Supporters: (916) 441-1010, www.protectmarriage.net (Analysis prepared by the League of Women Voters of California Education Fund  
On Propositions:
About our Analysis -
List of Props -
Election '00 -
Smart Voter
LWVC Home -
Voting Q&As -
State Props -
About Us
Last updated: January 18, 2000 Send comments and suggestions concerning the content of this page to lwvcprocon@hotmail.com. Send comments concerning the format or usability of this page to cmwatts@ibm.net Copyright 2000 League of Women Voters of California Education Fund. This page may be linked to or printed in its entirety. |
