2004 Kentucky Amendment 1

Last updated

Amendment 1
Flag of Kentucky.svg
November 2, 2004 (2004-11-02)

Are you in favor of amending the Kentucky Constitution to provide that only a marriage between one man and one woman shall be a marriage in Kentucky, and that a legal status identical to or similar to marriage for unmarried individuals shall not be valid or recognized?
Results
Choice
Votes %
Yes check.svg Yes1,222,12574.56%
X mark.svg No417,09725.44%
Valid votes1,639,22291.28%
Invalid or blank votes156,6608.72%
Total votes1,795,882100.00%
Registered voters/turnout2,794,28658.7%

2004 Kentucky Amendment 1 results map by county.svg
Results by county
Yes
  90–100%
  80–90%
  70–80%
  60–70%
  50–60%

Kentucky Constitutional Amendment 1 [3] 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. [4]

Contents

Text

The text of the amendment states:

Only a marriage between one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in Kentucky. A legal status identical or substantially similar to that of marriage for unmarried individuals shall not be valid or recognized. [5]

Legislative history

Amendments to the Kentucky Constitution require 3/5 support in both houses of the General Assembly and a majority vote by referendum; they can not be vetoed by the governor. The amendment was first introduced in the 2004 Kentucky General Assembly as Senate Bill 245. The bill subsequently passed both houses.

First Senate vote

The bill was initially passed by the senate on March 11 by a 33–4 vote.

House vote

Map of the vote
Democratic yea (51)
Democratic nay (10)
Democratic not voting (3)
Republican yea (34)
Republican nay (1)
Republican not voting (1) 2004 Kentucky Senate Bill 245 house vote.svg
Map of the vote
  Democratic yea (51)
  Democratic nay (10)
  Democratic not voting (3)
  Republican yea (34)
  Republican nay (1)
  Republican not voting (1)

The bill was approved by the house, with an amendment, on April 12 by a 85–11 vote.

House of Representatives vote
PartyVotes forVotes againstNot voting
Democratic (64)513
Republican (36)341
Total (100)85114

Second Senate vote

Map of the vote
Republican yea (21)
Republican nay (1)
Democratic yea (12)
Democratic nay (4) 2004 Kentucky Senate Bill 245 senate vote.svg
Map of the vote
  Republican yea (21)
  Republican nay (1)
  Democratic yea (12)
  Democratic nay (4)

The bill was approved by the senate again, with the house amendment, on April 13 by a 33–5 vote.

Senate vote
PartyVotes forVotes against
Democratic (16)12
Republican (22)21
Total (38)335

On September 10, 2013, the Kentucky Equality Federation sued the Commonwealth of Kentucky in Franklin Circuit Court claiming Kentucky's 2004 Constitutional Amendment banning same-sex marriage violated sections of the commonwealth's constitution. Case # 13-CI-1074 was assigned by the Franklin County Court Clerk (the location of the Kentucky State Capitol). The lawsuit was conceived by President Jordan Palmer, written and signed by Vice President of Legal Jillian Hall, Esq. On April 16, 2015, the case was decided in favor of the plaintiff by Franklin County Circuit Court Judge Thomas D. Wingate.

This provision also became void in 2015 when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Obergefell v. Hodges that the fundamental right to marry is guaranteed to same-sex couples by both the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

Results

Amendment 1 [6]
ChoiceVotes %
Check-71-128-204-brightblue.svg Yes1,222,12574.55
No417,09725.45
Total votes1,639,222100.00
Registered voters/turnout3,057,74153.6

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.

A constitutional amendment is a modification of the constitution of a polity, organization or other type of entity. Amendments are often interwoven into the relevant sections of an existing constitution, directly altering the text. Conversely, they can be appended to the constitution as supplemental additions, thus changing the frame of government without altering the existing text of the document.

<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 Constitution of the Commonwealth of Kentucky is the document that governs the Commonwealth of Kentucky. It was first adopted in 1792 and has since been rewritten three times and amended many more. The later versions were adopted in 1799, 1850, and 1891.

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">2004 Missouri Amendment 2</span> Referendum banning same-sex marriage

Constitutional Amendment 2 of 2004 is an amendment to the Missouri Constitution that prohibited same-sex marriages from being recognized in Missouri. The Amendment passed via public referendum on August 3, 2004, with 71% of voters supporting and 29% opposing. Every county voted in favor of the amendment, with only the independent city of St. Louis voting against it.

<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">South Carolina Amendment 1</span> South Carolinian anti-same-sex marriage constitutional amendment

South Carolina Amendment 1 of 2006 amended the South Carolina Constitution to make it unconstitutional for the U.S. state to recognize or perform same-sex marriages or civil unions. The referendum was approved by 78% of voters. Unlike the other sixteen such state amendments, South Carolina's explicitly disavows any effort to prevent private contracts between same-sex partners from being recognized—Virginia being the only state to do so.

<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 Texas Proposition 2</span>

Proposition 2 was a referendum for a state constitutional amendment placed on the ballot by the Texas legislature and approved by the voters at the November 8, 2005 general election. The measure added a new provision to the Texas Constitution, Article 1, Section 32, which provides that "Marriage in this state shall consist only of the union of one man and one woman", and "This state or a political subdivision of this state may not create or recognize any legal status identical or similar to marriage." Texas thus became the nineteenth US state to adopt constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage. It was the most populous state to adopt a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage until California passed its ban in November 2008. The amendment was later invalidated in June 2015 after the Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriage nationwide in the Obergefell v. Hodges decision, though the amendment remains in the Texas Constitution.

<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">2006 Alabama Amendment 774</span>

The Amendment 774 of 2006, also known as Alabama Sanctity of Marriage Amendment, is an amendment to the Alabama Constitution that makes it unconstitutional for the state to recognize or perform same-sex marriages or civil unions. The legislature passed Alabama Act 2005-35, which placed this amendment on the election ballot. The referendum was approved by 81% of the voters.

<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 Georgia Amendment 1</span> Referendum banning same-sex marriage

Georgia Constitutional Amendment 1 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.

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

Louisiana Constitutional Amendment 1 of 2004, is an amendment to the Louisiana Constitution that makes it unconstitutional for the state to recognize or perform same-sex marriages or civil unions. The referendum was approved by 78% of the voters.

<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">2008 Arizona Proposition 102</span> Successful referendum on an amendment banning same-sex marriage

Arizona Proposition 102 was an amendment to the constitution of the U.S. state of Arizona adopted by a ballot measure held in 2008. It added Article 30 of the Arizona Constitution, which says: "Only a union of one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in this state." The amendment added a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage to existing statutory bans in place since 1996. In October 2014, Article 30 of the Arizona Constitution was struck down as unconstitutional in the United States District Court for the District of Arizona, and is no longer enforced by the state of Arizona, which now allows and recognizes same-sex marriages.

<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.

References

  1. KENTUCKY STATE BOARD OF ELECTIONS REPORT OF "OFFICIAL" ELECTION NIGHT TALLY RESULTS TIME OF REPORT: 09:16:22 DATE OF REPORT: 11/24/04
  2. OFFICIAL GENERAL ELECTION RESULTS FOR UNITED STATES PRESIDENT NOVEMBER 2, 2004
  3. 2004 Election Night Tally Results Archived 2009-03-04 at the Wayback Machine , Kentucky State Board of Elections. Accessed 18 December 2006.
  4. CNN.com Election 2004 - Ballot Measures Archived September 6, 2013, at the Wayback Machine Accessed 30 November 2006.
  5. Kentucky Constitution, Section 233A Archived 2007-03-09 at the Wayback Machine , Kentucky Legislature. Accessed 18 December 2006.
  6. "2004 General Election Turnout Rates". United States Election Project. June 4, 2013. Archived from the original on July 9, 2013.