Windhoek, Namibia – 05, 20, 2021: Namibian LGBTQIA rights Activists demonstrate in protest march in support of recognition of same sex marriages
Photo: Shutterstock
With the overturning of Roe v. Wade causing a crisis in abortion care across the country, the LGBTQ+ community and its allies are terrified that something similar could happen to marriage equality. Many conservative figures have said their eyes are on Obergefell v. Hodges, and that the landmark ruling legalizing marriage equality nationwide may very well be on the chopping block, especially with Justice Clarence Thomas saying it warrants a second look.
States across the country are now scrambling to get marriage equality measures on the ballot so that, in the event that Obergefell is overturned, they have some additional protections. In the upcoming election, there are 3 ballot measures relating to marriage equality.
Related:
California Proposition 3
Your LGBTQ+ guide to Election 2024
Stay ahead of the 2024 Election with our newsletter that covers candidates, issues, and perspectives that matter.
On the California ballot is Proposition 3, a measure designed to repeal the famed proposition 8, an anti-gay ballot measure from 2008. Proposition 8 stated that marriage was a union strictly between a man and a woman and was controversial even at the time it was passed.
Proposition 8 was deemed illegal by the Supreme Court in 2013, however it remains in the California Constitution. If Obergefell is overturned, then California’s constitution would prohibit gay marriage.
The text of Proposition 3 as it appears on the ballot is, “A YES vote on this measure means: Language in the California Constitution would be updated to match who currently can marry. There would be no change in who can marry.”
“A NO vote on this measure means: Language in the California Constitution would not be changed. There would be no change in who can marry.”
State Sen. Toni Atkins (D) said of this measure, “Here in California, we believe the ability to marry the person you love, regardless of race, ethnicity, gender, or sexual orientation, is a fundamental right. During a time when our civil rights are under attack by courts and state houses across the nation, we cannot afford to wait to enshrine marriage equality in California’s Constitution – the time to act is now.”
California Rep. Robert Garcia (D) said, “Prop 3 is about protecting the rights of our community and ensuring equality for all in our state. As ballots are being mailed out, I urge every Californian to vote yes on Prop 3 and stand with us in defending love, dignity, and respect for all.”
Colorado Amendment J
In Colorado, Amendment J is a ballot measure that seeks to remove a section from the Colorado Constitution that prohibits marriage equality. The section reads, “only a union of one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in this state.”
The text of the ballot measure reads, “A ‘yes’ vote supports removing the provision of the state constitution that says that ‘only a union of one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in this state.’”
“A ‘no’ vote opposes removing the provision of the state constitution that says that ‘only a union of one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in this state.’”
Amendment J does not add anything to the constitution and would therefore make marriage equality more ambiguous. A simple majority is required to pass this measure.
Colorado State Sen. Joann Ginal (D), who introduced the measure, said, “As representatives of the people of Colorado, it is our shared responsibility to uphold the principles of equality and justice for all citizens, regardless of political affiliations. While we’re protected today, our state constitution still reflects outdated language and values.”
“Our LGBTQ community is very afraid,” said State Sen. Sonya Jaquez Lewis (D), “living in fear that rights will be taken away.”
Hawaii Question 1
On the ballot in Hawaii is “Hawaii Remove Legislature Authority to Limit Marriage to Opposite-Sex Couples Amendment,” also known as Question 1. This measure was designed to remove a 1998 provision in the state Constitution that prohibits same-sex marriage.
Same-sex marriage was legalized in the state in 2013; however, if Obergefell is overturned, the provision could put the existing law in jeopardy. Question 1 adds nothing to the constitution. Rather, it only proposes the removal of the harmful language.
The text of the measure reads, “A ‘yes’ vote supports removing a provision of the constitution that states that ‘the legislature shall have the power to reserve marriage to opposite-sex couples.’”
“A ‘no’ vote opposes removing a provision of the constitution that states that ‘the legislature shall have the power to reserve marriage to opposite-sex couples.’”
Gov. Josh Green (D) expressed his support for the measure, saying, “I’ve always stood on the side of advancing equality and civil rights in our state, from my time in the House, Senate, and now as governor. Since the first constitutional convention, our state has uniquely and rightly sought to affirm protections and civil rights for all citizens of the state of Hawaiʻi. Voting yes on this constitutional amendment furthers the goal of protecting the rights of our LGBTQ+ ʻohana,”
U.S. Senator Brian Schatz said, “Hawai’i’s constitution should be a reflection of our state’s diversity and our values. That’s why I’m voting yes on ConAm Question #1. It will remove a relic of the past and affirm our commitment to treating LGBTQ+ people with the dignity they deserve.”
Subscribe to the LGBTQ Nation newsletter and be the first to know about the latest headlines shaping LGBTQ+ communities worldwide.
