06/23/2008
Gay Advocacy Groups to Court: Strike Marriage Ban from CA Ballot
Gay advocacy groups led by Equality California have asked the California Supreme Court to remove the proposed state constitutional ban on same-sex marriage from the November ballot:
"In papers filed four days after the legalized same-sex weddings began around the state, advocacy groups argued that the measure would change the state's Constitution so profoundly that it would amount to a revision. Under the law, the Constitution cannot be revised by initiative alone - a two-thirds legislative approval is also needed before the measure goes to the voters. 'If enacted, (the November initiative) would eviscerate the principle of equal citizenship for gay and lesbian people and strip the courts of their authority to enforce basic constitutional guarantees,' said Stephen Bomse, lawyer for the groups."
Naturally, right wing groups are apoplectic:
"Equality California and its allies are desperate to evade democracy...First, they used the courts to erase the votes of nearly 5 million Californians who voted to protect marriage. Now they are trying to silence the people's voice forever. This is just another attempt to force a radical political agenda upon the people of California."
MORE SAME-SEX MARRIAGE NEWS FROM THE GOLDEN STATE
Gay weddings continued to boom in the first weekend since California's same-sex marriage law went into effects.
The hot new wedding gift? Political donations: "The National Organization for Marriage's personalized Web sites and Equality California's wedding registry illustrate how the electronic fundraising innovations of the 2008 presidential campaign are being adapted to a single-issue campaign at the state level, experts said. 'With what Obama did through social networking and what we've seen as far as political campaigns starting to do, this definitely seems to be the future of fundraising,' said Brian Brown, executive director of the organization."
San Diego County Clerk Gregory Smith says some county employees have been reassigned because of "sincerely held religious objections" to same-sex marriage: "No employee is being allowed to perform marriage duties involving only heterosexual couples, Smith said. Instead, employees are being shifted to other duties that do not include issuing marriage licenses, officiating at civil weddings or acting as witnesses. Smith cited Government Code Section 12940, which requires an employer to explore 'any available reasonable alternative means of accommodating the religious belief or observance [of an employee], including the possibilities of excusing the person from those duties that conflict with his or her religious belief.'"
More on the conflict between work ethics and personal beliefs from the L.A. Times...
Previously
BOOM: California issues massive number of marriage licenses [tr]
Soulforce Founders Mel White and Gary Nixon Married in Pasadena [tr]
Two Legal Appeals to Stop Same-Sex Marriages Fail [tr]
George Takei and Brad Altman Get Marriage License in WeHo [tr]
Veteran Bob Lehman and Tom Felkner are First Married in San Diego [tr]
Star Trek's George Takei and Brad Altman Talk Marriage [tr]
Outside City Hall [tr]
Inside City Hall: Del and Phyllis Cut the Cake [tr]
Same-Sex Marriage Legal in California [tr]
The First Same-Sex Couple to Marry in L.A. [tr]
5:01 PM [tr]
Posted 8:35 AM EST by Andy in California, Gay Marriage, News | Permalink
Like it?
Subscribe to FREE Towleroad daily headlines with our RSS feed!
RECENT STORIES:
Comments
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
I don't get it...IF the Supreme Crt ruled that denying the LGBT community the RIGHT to Marry is Un-Constititutional...how could a referedum reverse that? If that's the case...could a citizens grp get Signatures to put on the Ballot..say, "The return of Slavery"..and have the public vote on it? Even if it was Ruled Un-Constitutional?
LIBERTY & JUSTICE FOR ALL, NOT JUST SOME!!!!
Posted by: Disgusted American | Jun 23, 2008 9:32:10 AM
Whatever... these people are complete loons. I understand and respect religious freedom, but that doesn't give folks carte blanche to run over the rights of others. It simply is astounding they continue to rant and rave and don't take 5 seconds to look in the mirror and see just how utterly ridiculous they sound. And as far as resigning from your job for "religious objections" - that's nice; but hardly news.
Posted by: Mike | Jun 23, 2008 9:38:28 AM
On the money, Disgusted, on the money.
The momentum is there. Here in RI, we had our Pride Festival Saturday. This was the first year that the local television stations and newspapers covered the extensive number of corporate sponsors and not the gyrating disco boys in their skivvies, leather daddys or drag queens.
The context of the Providence Journal was more of "perhaps there is something to this equality thing, what with the likes of Bank of America, Shaws (grocery chain), AT&T, Verizon, etc... supporting the gay community".
My partner and I were proud to sign the forms for Marriage Equality Rhode Island. From the looks of completed stack, they had several thousand signatures in support of same-sex marriage for our state. We have decided, yes, we could jump the border to MA and get married, but like George Takei, when it is legal in this state, we will be one of the first couples in line.
Posted by: Rad | Jun 23, 2008 9:44:58 AM
Disgusted American,
My guess is that it was ruled unconstitutional vis a vis the STATE constitution.
Therefore, in order to make it constitutional, you amend the constitution by referendum.
Posted by: DAVID | Jun 23, 2008 10:08:00 AM
I think David's interpretation is correct. (Slavery, incidentally, is banned by the federal Constitution, which is superior to all state constitutions, so they can't bring that back by petition.)
According to Art. 18 on the California Constitution, the Legislature can propose "amendments or revisions," but "the electors may amend the Constitution by initiative" (Sec. 3), implying that they cannot propose revisions that way. A poster with a legal background can probably explain this in more detail.
It's worth noting that Art. 2 of the California Constitution also allows voters to recall judges, so watch out for that.
Posted by: Ben | Jun 23, 2008 10:40:14 AM
On E!'s The SOUP this weekend Joel McHale seriously remarked "No that Gay Marriage has been FORCED UPON US here in California..."
That really pissed me off- like Gay people are forcing anything on anybody- they are just wanting the same rights. All I have to say is F U Joel McHale. Consider unleashing yourself on that stupid guy by emailing E!. Too bad it's been forced upon you.
Posted by: Suzie | Jun 23, 2008 10:51:12 AM
Yeah, I caught the Joel McHale comment on "The Soup". He sounded like he was reading right from an old Jay Leno script. Then he played some obnoxious montage of clips trying to subvert the context of public gay couples ("HA! HA!") Considering all the "wink wink nudge nudge" gay content his show seems to zero in on, on E! and Bravo, it really felt out of character. I was rather disappointed.
Is this a closet belief system coming to the surface?
Posted by: Rad | Jun 23, 2008 11:15:55 AM
I personally think that the California gay marriages is going to stick because, at the end of the day, it is still all about the almighty dollar. the economy is going to get a nice boost...and people aren't going to give that up. Plus, it is true most people aren't going to give a damn, as these right wingnuts want everyone to think. I mean, the Govenor is encouraging folks to come the state to get married, what is that telling you?
Posted by: Paul | Jun 23, 2008 1:38:03 PM
I can't see myself marrying another guy, but I still have a little respect for the laws of this country. The court has ruled that a ban is unconstitutional, that should be the end of the issue. Especially when they're trying to outlaw it again based solely on religous practices. That's also unconstitutional. I have no problem with a man and a woman, two men, or two women marrying. Just don't think you also have the right to force me to watch to ugly people kiss, gay or straight. It's disgusting.
Posted by: Garst | Jun 23, 2008 3:32:07 PM
You guys (Suzie & Rad) - the Joel McHale comment on The Soup was funny but in a completely different way than how you remember it.
He was mocking the backlash by saying Californians were being forced into gay marriage, that is, even straight people would have to marry somebody of the same-sex. When he started with the "forced upon us" stuff, he got my attention, but I think if you watch it again or find it on YouTube, you may change your mind as he goes on.
Posted by: Rey | Jun 24, 2008 12:06:10 AM
There will always be people against equality. Marriage is a basic civil right that should be attainable by all Americans if they choose. They say that gay marriage will bring 100 millions $$ a year to California. Just think if they passed it federally we'd be closer to a balanced budget. :) For those who want more info on gay marriage check out our short produced to educate & defuse the controversy. It has a way of opening closed minds & provides some sanity on the issue: www.OUTTAKEonline.com
Posted by: Charlotte | Jun 24, 2008 8:21:22 AM
Rey is right. I was watching the Soup and found nothing offensive. Joel was just aping (and exaggerating) the views of idiots.
Posted by: Paul R | Jun 24, 2008 1:46:24 PM
Right wing groups are complainging that gays "used the courts to erase the votes of nearly 5 million Californians who voted to protect marriage."
The population of California is about 36.5 million, so 5 million is nowhere near a majority.
Does anyone know the turnout from the election when the first initiative passed? It's really sad that so many people don't bother to vote, and then one-seventh of the population gets their way just because they did vote.
Posted by: Christopher | Jun 27, 2008 8:36:20 PM
Hmm, a republican oriented Supreme Court allows Gay Marriage during a year that a highly contested Presidential Race is occurring. It then allows a Ban Referendum on Gay Marriage to proceed to the ballot. I can't believe any of you are surprised that this was not a ploy by republicans to bring people to the polls to vote against gays and for McCain at the same time.
Posted by: Speedieg | Jul 17, 2008 7:22:49 AM