Marriage Equality and Proposition 8
The League of Women Voters of California opposed Proposition 8 on the November 2008 ballot. The proposition was passed by the voters on November 4, 2008 with 52 percent of the vote.
Proposition 8 amended the California Constitution to specify that only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California. As a result, same-sex couples were no longer allowed to marry in California, and such marriages entered into in other jurisdictions would not be recognized in California.
After the passage of Proposition 8, various petitioners, including a number of cities and counties, challenged Proposition 8. The League filed an amicus brief in support of the petition challenging the measure filed by the City and County of San Francisco and other counties and cities. Ultimately, the California Supreme Court upheld Proposition 8 in a case called Strauss v. Horton. See the LWVC’s statement about the Supreme Court’s ruling.
Opponents of Proposition 8 brought a separate federal action that challenged its constitutionality under the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. On August 4, 2010, Judge Vaughn R. Walker of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California struck down Proposition 8. Perry v. Schwarzenegger, No. C 09-2292 VRW. The opinion found that Proposition 8 violates the Equal Protection Clause because “Excluding same-sex couples from marriage is simply not rationally related to a legitimate state interest.” It further found that domestic partnership is an inadequate and discriminatory substitute for marriage. The court ordered an injunction against continued enforcement of Proposition 8.
On November 17, 2011 the CA Supreme Court ruled that proponents of an initiative have legal standing to defend its constitutionality and to appeal a judgment invalidating it. Therefore, the proponents of Proposition 8 can defend its validity, since the Attorney General and Governor had declined to do so after the measure was struck down by the federal court. (That ruling is currently on appeal.) We filed this amicus brief supporting the state’s argument that proponents did not have that authority.
Legal experts anticipate that the case will ultimately come before the United States Supreme Court.
Background on Proposition 8
The constitutional amendment created by Proposition 8 used the same language as an earlier statute, Proposition 22, which passed in 2000. Proposition 22 added a provision to the Family Code stating that “Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.”
The LWVC opposed Proposition 22 and participated in a successful lawsuit to retain the Attorney General’s title for Proposition 22, which made it clear that the proposition placed a limitation on marriage but did not define marriage. Proposition 22 ultimately passed on March 7, 2000.
Proposition 22 was overturned by the California Supreme Court’s decision in In re Marriage Cases, on May 15, 2008. In In re Marriage Cases (2008) 43 Cal.4th 757, the California Supreme Court declared that the right to marry is a fundamental constitutional right under the California Constitution. At the time, California was one of just two states in the country that gave full marriage rights to gay and lesbian couples. (The jurisdictions that currently allow same-sex marriages are Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Vermont, and the District of Columbia.) Under the federal Defense of Marriage Act signed in 1996, the federal government does not recognize these marriages or give the couples any federal rights associated with marriage. Because of the separation of church and state, religious groups and clergy are subject only to the guidelines of their own religion, although many now support civil marriages for all couples and some perform religious ceremonies as well.
As a result of In re Marriage Cases, gay and lesbian couples in California became entitled to a civil marriage, which is a contract entered into under state law. Some 18,000 couples exercised that right after the ruling became effective. However, such marriages were no longer allowed after the passage of Proposition 8.
Background on the League's Position
The League of Women Voters takes stands on ballot measures only if it has existing position or principles on which to base its stand. The LWVC based its opposition to Proposition 8, and its earlier opposition to Proposition 22, on the following principles and positions of the League of Women Voters of the United States.
LWVUS Principles:
The League of Women Voters believes that . . . no person or group should suffer legal, economic or administrative discrimination.
LWVUS Social Policy Position:
The LWVUS Social Policy statement of position is to secure equal rights and equal opportunity for all; promote social and economic justice and the health and safety of all Americans. Under the LWVUS Equality of Opportunity position, the League supports equal rights for all regardless of sex. The League supports action to bring laws into compliance with the Equal Rights Amendment: a) to eliminate or amend those laws that have the effect of discriminating on the basis of sex; b) to promote laws that support the goals of the ERA.
Individual Liberties Position:
LWVUS Individual Liberties position:
The League opposes major threats to basic constitutional rights.
On June 14, 2010, the League of Women Voters of the United States at its biennial convention adopted by consensus the following position on Marriage Equality:
The League of Women Voters of the United States supports equal rights for all under state and federal law. LWVUS supports legislation to equalize the legal rights, obligations, and benefits available to same-gender couples with those available to heterosexual couples. LWVUS supports legislation to permit same-gender couples to marry under civil law. The League believes that the civil status of marriage is already clearly distinguished from the religious institution of marriage and that religious rights will be preserved.
Links
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit’s Proposition 8 Web page: http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/content/view.php?pk_id=0000000472
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California’s Proposition 8 Web page: https://ecf.cand.uscourts.gov/cand/09cv2292/
California Supreme Court’s Proposition 8 Web page: http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/courts/supreme/highprofile/prop8.htm
Wikipedia, “Same-Sex Marriage in the United States”: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage_in_the_United_States
Wikipedia, “California Proposition 8 (2008)”: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_8_%282008%29