2004 Georgia Amendment 1

Last updated

Amendment 1
Flag of Georgia (U.S. state).svg
November 2, 2004

Definition of Marriage Amendment
Results
Choice
Votes %
Check-71-128-204-brightblue.svgYes2,454,93076.15%
Light brown x.svgNo768,71623.85%
Valid votes3,223,64697.63%
Invalid or blank votes78,2292.37%
Total votes3,301,875100.00%
Registered voters/turnout4,248,83775.87%

2004 Georgia Amendment 1 results map by county.svg
Sources: [1] [2] [3]

Georgia Constitutional Amendment 1 [4] of 2004, is an amendment to the Georgia Constitution that previously made it unconstitutional for the state to recognize or perform same-sex marriages or civil unions. The referendum was approved by 76% of the voters. [5]

Contents

The text of the amendment states:

(a) This state shall recognize as marriage only the union of man and woman. Marriages between persons of the same sex are prohibited in this state.
(b) No union between persons of the same sex shall be recognized by this state as entitled to the benefits of marriage. This state shall not give effect to any public act, record, or judicial proceeding of any other state or jurisdiction respecting a relationship between persons of the same sex that is treated as a marriage under the laws of such other state or jurisdiction. The courts of this state shall have no jurisdiction to grant a divorce or separate maintenance with respect to any such relationship or otherwise to consider or rule on any of the parties' respective rights arising as a result of or in connection with such relationship. [6]

The amendment was challenged in court. On May 16, 2006, a lower court in Georgia struck down the amendment, [7] but on July 7, 2006, the Supreme Court of Georgia overturned the lower court thus leaving the amendment as part of the Georgia Constitution. [8]

As a result of the Supreme Court ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges Amendment 1 was declared unconstitutional on June 26, 2015, legalizing same-sex marriage in Georgia. [9]

Pre-decision opinion polls

Date of opinion pollConducted by Sample size In favorAgainstUndecidedMarginMargin of ErrorSource
Before October 26, 2004 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution / WSB-TV  ?+60% ? ? ? ? [10]
Early October 2004The Atlanta Journal-Constitution Poll800 registered voters75%20%5%55% pro±3.5%The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
September 2004 University of Georgia Survey Research Center1,000 respondents70-75%20-25%Not specified50% pro±4%University of Georgia Survey Research Center

Results

Amendment 1 [11]
ChoiceVotes %
Check-71-128-204-brightblue.svg Yes2,454,93076.25
No768,71623.85
Total votes3,223,646100.00

Effects

The amendment constitutionally banned same-sex marriages, which were never recognized by the state and was statutorily banned since 1996, and civil unions or civil union equivalents, which were never recognized by the state. This preempted the state judiciary from requiring the state to legally recognize same-sex marriages or civil unions or civil union equivalents and preempted the Georgia General Assembly from enacting a statute legalizing same-sex marriages or civil unions or civil union equivalents. Domestic partnerships in Georgia, legal in 2 counties and 5 municipalities at the time, were unaffected by the amendment.

Lawsuits

O'Kelley v. Cox

O'Kelley v. Cox was a case filed on July 23, 2004, concerning the constitutionality of a proposed amendment to the Georgia Constitution that sought to ban same-sex marriage. The case focused on whether the proposed amendment complied with the state's single-subject rule for constitutional amendments. On September 29, 2004, Fulton County Superior Court Judge Constance C. Russell denied the plaintiffs' request for injunctive relief and dismissed the complaint, ruling that the proposed amendment was valid and could appear on the ballot. The plaintiffs appealed the decision to the Georgia Supreme Court. The Georgia Supreme Court issued a 5-2 ruling on October 26, 2004, upholding the trial court's decision. The court ruled that the proposed amendment did not violate the single-subject rule of the Georgia Constitution. The decision allowed the amendment to proceed to the ballot, where it was subsequently approved by voters in November 2004. [12] [10]

Perdue v. O'Kelley

Perdue v. O'Kelley was a legal case filed on March 10, 2006, which challenged the validity of Constitutional Amendment 1. The plaintiffs in Perdue v. O'Kelley argued that the amendment violated the Georgia Constitution's single-subject rule, which mandates that amendments must address only one issue. They contended that the amendment's broad language encompassed multiple issues and was therefore unconstitutional. On May 17, 2006, Fulton County Superior Court Judge Constance C. Russell ruled that the amendment violated the single-subject rule of the Georgia Constitution. Judge Russell determined that the amendment addressed more than one subject, which was not permitted under Georgia law. However, the court's decision was primarily concerned with procedural issues rather than the substantive constitutionality of the amendment itself. Her ruling did not impact the statutory prohibition on same-sex marriage in Georgia, which remained in effect. The ruling was appealed to the Georgia Supreme Court. On July 6, 2006, the Georgia Supreme Court, in a 6-0 ruling, with Justice Harold D. Melton not participating, reversed the lower court's decision and upheld the amendment. The court ruled that the amendment did not violate the single-subject rule and that it was valid under the Georgia Constitution. The decision allowed the amendment take effect again. [13] [14]

See also

Related Research Articles

The Federal Marriage Amendment (FMA), also referred to by proponents as the Marriage Protection Amendment, was a proposed amendment to the United States Constitution that would legally define marriage as a union of one man and one woman. The FMA would also prevent judicial extension of marriage rights to same-sex couples.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Utah Constitutional Amendment 3</span> 2004 referendum

Utah Constitutional Amendment 3 was an amendment to the Utah state constitution that sought to define marriage as a union exclusively between a man and woman. It passed in the November 2, 2004, election, as did similar amendments in ten other states.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">U.S. state constitutional amendments banning same-sex unions</span>

Prior to the Supreme Court's decision in Obergefell v. Hodges (2015), U.S. state constitutional amendments banning same-sex unions of several different types passed, banning legal recognition of same-sex unions in U.S. state constitutions, referred to by proponents as "defense of marriage amendments" or "marriage protection amendments." These state amendments are different from the proposed Federal Marriage Amendment, which would ban same-sex marriage in every U.S. state, and Section 2 of the Defense of Marriage Act, more commonly known as DOMA, which allowed the states not to recognize same-sex marriages from other states. The amendments define marriage as a union between one man and one woman and prevent civil unions or same-sex marriages from being legalized, though some of the amendments bar only the latter. The Obergefell decision in June 2015 invalidated these state constitutional amendments insofar as they prevented same-sex couples from marrying, even though the actual text of these amendments remain written into the state constitutions.

The Tennessee Marriage Protection Amendment, also known as Tennessee Amendment 1 of 2006, is a state constitutional amendment banning same-sex unions. The referendum was approved by 81% of voters. It specified that only a marriage between a man and a woman could be legally recognized in the state of Tennessee. This prohibited same-sex marriages within the state, reinforcing previously existing statutes to the same effect until it was overturned by the Obergefell v. Hodges ruling in June 2015.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">1998 Alaska Measure 2</span> Referendum banning same-sex marriage

Ballot Measure 2 of 1998 is a ballot measure, since ruled unconstitutional, that added an amendment to the Alaska Constitution that prohibited the recognition of same-sex marriage in Alaska. The Ballot measure was sparked by the lawsuit filed by Jay Brause and Gene Dugan, after the two men were denied a marriage license by the Alaska Bureau of Vital Statistics. In Brause v. Bureau of Vital Statistics, 1998 WL 88743, the Alaska Superior Court ruled that the state needed compelling reason to deny marriage licenses to same-sex couples and ordered a trial on the question. In response, the Alaska Legislature immediately proposed and passed Resolution 42, which became what is now known as Ballot Measure 2. Ballot Measure 2 passed via public referendum on November 3, 1998, with 68% of voters supporting and 32% opposing. The Bause case was dismissed following the passage of the ballot measure.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2006 Wisconsin Referendum 1</span>

Wisconsin Referendum 1 of 2006 was a referendum on an amendment to the Wisconsin Constitution that would invalidate same-sex marriages or any substantially similar legal status. The referendum was approved by 59% of voters during the general elections in November 2006. All counties in the state voted for the amendment except Dane County, which opposed it. The constitutional amendment created by Referendum 1 has been effectively nullified since June 26, 2015, when the United States Supreme Court ruled in Obergefell v. Hodges that state-level bans on same-sex marriage are unconstitutional.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2006 Idaho Amendment 2</span>

Idaho Amendment 2 of 2006 is an amendment to the Idaho Constitution that made it unconstitutional for the state to recognize or perform same-sex marriages or civil unions.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2005 Kansas Amendment 1</span>

Kansas Amendment 1, which was put before voters on April 5, 2005, is an amendment to the Kansas Constitution that makes it unconstitutional for the state to recognize or perform same-sex marriages or civil unions. The referendum was approved by 70% of the voters.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Nebraska Initiative 416</span> Referendum banning same-sex marriage

Nebraska Initiative 416 was a 2000 ballot initiative that amended the Nebraska Constitution to make it unconstitutional for the state to recognize or perform same-sex marriage, same-sex civil unions or domestic partnerships. The referendum was approved on November 7, 2000, by 70% of the voters. The initiative has since been struck down in federal court and same-sex marriage is now legally recognized in the state of Nebraska.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2004 Arkansas Amendment 3</span> Same-sex marriage ban

Constitutional Amendment 3 of 2004, is an amendment to the Arkansas Constitution that makes it unconstitutional for the state to recognize or perform same-sex marriages or civil unions. The referendum was approved by 75% of the voters.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2004 Kentucky Amendment 1</span> Referendum banning same-sex marriage

Kentucky Constitutional Amendment 1 of 2004, is an amendment to the Kentucky Constitution that made it unconstitutional for the state to recognize or perform same-sex marriages or civil unions. The referendum was approved by 75% of the voters.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2004 Michigan Proposal 04-2</span> Referendum banning same-sex marriage

Michigan Proposal 04-2 of 2004, is an amendment to the Michigan Constitution that made it unconstitutional for the state to recognize or perform same-sex marriages or civil unions. The referendum was approved by 59% of the voters. The amendment faced multiple legal challenges and was finally overturned in Obergefell v. Hodges by the U.S. Supreme Court.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2004 Oklahoma State Question 711</span> Referendum banning same-sex marriage

Oklahoma Question 711 of 2004, was an amendment to the Oklahoma Constitution that defined marriage as the union of a man and a woman, thus rendering recognition or performance of same-sex marriages or civil unions null within the state prior to its being ruled unconstitutional. The referendum was approved by 76 percent of the voters.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">1998 Hawaii Amendment 2</span> Referendum on same-sex marriage

Constitutional Amendment 2 of 1998 amended the Constitution of Hawaii, granting the state legislature the power to prevent same-sex marriage from being conducted or recognized in Hawaii. Amendment 2 was the first constitutional amendment adopted in the United States that specifically targeted same-sex partnerships.

Same-sex marriage has been legally recognized in Wisconsin since October 6, 2014, upon the resolution of a lawsuit challenging the state's ban on same-sex marriage. On October 6, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal of an appellate court ruling in Wolf v. Walker that had found Wisconsin's ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional. The appellate court issued its order prohibiting enforcement of the state's ban on same-sex marriage the next day and Wisconsin counties began issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples immediately. Wisconsin had previously recognized domestic partnerships, which afforded limited legal rights to same-sex couples, from August 2009 until they were discontinued in April 2018.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2008 Florida Amendment 2</span> Referendum on legally defining marriage as heterosexual

Florida Amendment 2 is an amendment made to the constitution of the U.S. state of Florida in 2008. It added Article I, Section 27 to the constitution, which defines marriage as a union only between one man and one woman, and thus bans the creation of similar unions, such as civil unions or same-sex marriage.

Citizens for Equal Protection v. Bruning, 455 F.3d 859, was a federal lawsuit filed in the United States District Court for the District of Nebraska and decided on appeal by the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. It challenged the federal constitutionality of Nebraska Initiative Measure 416, a 2000 ballot initiative that amended the Nebraska Constitution to prohibit the recognition of same-sex marriages, civil unions, and other same-sex relationships.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">North Carolina Amendment 1</span>

North Carolina Amendment 1 is a partially overturned legislatively referred constitutional amendment in North Carolina that amended the Constitution of North Carolina to add ARTICLE XIV, Section 6, which prohibit the state from recognizing or performing same-sex marriages, civil unions or civil union equivalents by defining male–female marriage as "the only domestic legal union" considered valid or recognized in the state. It did not prohibit domestic partnerships in the state and also constitutionally protected same-sex and opposite-sex prenuptial agreements, which is the only part that is still in effect today. On May 8, 2012, North Carolina voters approved the amendment, 61% to 39%, with a voter turnout of 35%. On May 23, 2012, the amendment took effect.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2006 Virginia ballot measures</span>

The 2006 Virginia State Elections took place on Election Day, November 7, 2006, the same day as the U.S. House and the U.S. Senate elections in the state. The only statewide elections on the ballot were three constitutional referendums to amend the Virginia State Constitution. Because Virginia state elections are held on off-years, no statewide officers or state legislative elections were held. All referendums were referred to the voters by the Virginia General Assembly.

Same-sex marriage has been legal in the U.S. state of Georgia since the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges on June 26, 2015. Attorney General Sam Olens announced that Georgia would "adhere to the ruling of the Court", and the first couple married just one hour after the ruling was handed down. Previously, Georgia had banned same-sex marriage both by statute and its State Constitution.

References

  1. Georgia Election Results Official Results of the November 2, 2004 General Election
  2. Voter Turnout by Demographics
  3. OFFICIAL GENERAL ELECTION RESULTS FOR UNITED STATES PRESIDENT NOVEMBER 2, 2004
  4. Official Results of the November 2, 2004 General Election Archived December 13, 2006, at the Wayback Machine , Georgia Secretary of State. Accessed 18 December 2006.
  5. CNN.com Election 2004 - Ballot Measures Accessed 30 November 2006.
  6. Constitution of the State of Georgia Archived 2007-01-12 at the Wayback Machine , Article I, section IV, Georgia Secretary of State. Accessed 18 December 2006.
  7. Same-Sex Marriage Amendment Is Struck Down by Georgia Judge - New York Times -- Accessed 30 October 2008
  8. Georgia Court Upholds a Referendum Banning Same-Sex Marriage - New Your Times -- Accessed 30 October 2008
  9. "Couples across metro marry after same-sex ruling by Supreme Court". Archived from the original on June 28, 2015. Retrieved June 27, 2015.
  10. 1 2 "Judge Denies Injunction to Block Marriage Amendment". AccessWDUN. October 19, 2004. Archived from the original on August 9, 2024. Retrieved August 9, 2024.
  11. "2004 General Election Turnout Rates". United States Election Project. June 4, 2013. Archived from the original on July 9, 2013.
  12. "O'Kelley v. Cox". Justia. 2004. Retrieved August 9, 2024.
  13. "Perdue v. O'Kelley". Justia. 2006. Retrieved August 9, 2024.
  14. "Georgia Court Upholds Referendum Banning Same-Sex Marriage". The New York Times. July 7, 2006. Retrieved August 9, 2024.