2005 Texas Proposition 2

Last updated

Proposition 2
Flag of Texas.svg
November 8, 2005
Definition of Marriage Act [1] [2]
Results
Choice
Votes %
In Favor1,723,78276.25%
Against536,91323.75%
Total votes2,260,695100.00%
Registered voters/turnout12,577,54517.97%
2005 Texas Proposition 2 results map by county.svg
Source: [3] [4]

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." [5] 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.

Contents

Full text

Article 1, Section 32 of the Texas Constitution, as amended, states: [6]

(a) Marriage in this state shall consist only of the union of one man and one woman.

(b) This state or a political subdivision of this state may not create or recognize any legal status identical or similar to marriage.

The joint resolution proposing the amendment included additional language about rights that the ban on same-sex marriage was not meant to restrict: [7] [8]

This state recognizes that through the designation of guardians, the appointment of agents, and the use of private contracts, persons may adequately and properly appoint guardians and arrange rights relating to hospital visitation, property, and the entitlement to proceeds of life insurance policies without the existence of any legal status identical or similar to marriage.

Legislative approval

As provided in Article 17, Section 1 of the Texas Constitution, [9] a proposed constitutional amendment is placed on the ballot only after the Texas legislature has proposed the amendment in a joint resolution of both the Texas senate and the Texas house of representatives. The joint resolution may originate in either chamber. The resolution must be adopted by a vote of at least two-thirds of the membership of each chamber. That means a minimum of 100 votes in the house and 21 votes in the senate.

On April 25, 2005, the house voted 101 in favor and 29 against the proposed amendment to ban same-sex marriage and civil unions, authored by Warren Chisum. [10] On May 21, 2005, the senate voted 21 in favor and 8 against the proposed amendment, and the ballot was set for November 8. [11]

Campaign

Campaign funding and spending

Proponents raised $122,000, almost all from two donors, and opponents $391,000 in support of their campaigns on the proposition. [12]

Proposition 2 attracted nearly $1.3 million in contributions. Seven committees opposing the proposition raised $782,410, almost 55 percent more than the nearly $506,000 collected by nine committees supporting it. Four committees against the measure raised $774,440, or almost 99 percent of the money raised to fight Proposition 2.

Ballot committeePositionTotal
Texans For Marriage Pro$339,880
Heritage Alliance PACPro$67,903
Focus on the Family Texas Marriage Amendment CommitteePro$51,188
Reagan Legacy Republican WomenPro$16,857
Texas Marriage AlliancePro$10,175
Vote Yes On Prop. TwoPro$5,500
Conservative Republicans of TexasPro$8,750
Conservative Republicans of Harris County Pro$5,433
Pro total$505,991
No Nonsense in NovemberCon$350,096
Vote Against the AmendmentCon$221,495
No Nonsense in 2006Con$125,157
Save Texas MarriageCon$77,694
Practice What You Preach Con$4,858
Tarrant County Stonewall Democrats Con$1,740
Texans UnitedCon$1,369
Con total$782,409
Total$1,288,400
ContributorStateIndustryPositionTotal
National Gay & Lesbian Task Force Washington, DCGay RightsCon$111,979
Bob J. Perry Houston, TexasHome BuildersPro$110,000
Tim Gill Denver, ColoradoGay RightsCon$100,000
James LeiningerSan Antonio, TexasPharmaceuticals & Health ProductsPro$100,000
Vaquillas LLCLaredo, TexasLivestockPro$100,000

Contributors across state lines

  • The National Gay & Lesbian Task Force gave nearly $122,000. All but $10,000 went to one committee in Texas.
  • Focus on the Family, a Colorado-based Christian organization led by Dr. James Dobson, gave almost $51,200 to a Texas committee it formed. Although the group's Kansas committee did not report any contributions, it did disclose expenditures of nearly $24,500, mostly on radio advertisements.
  • The Human Rights Campaign, a national organization promoting equality for homosexuals, contributed $34,900 to oppose the Texas measure. [13]

Supporters

Supporters for the Proposition 2 (2005) were approximately 76% of the Texas voting population. Supporters claimed that marriage is a union between a man and a woman and these unions creates a child. The poll show at the time of the voting was approximately 82% in a public poll. The Texas Governor Rick Perry said at the time of the voting said, "Like the vast majority of Texans, I believe that marriage represents a sacred union between a man and a woman." Although his signature was irrelevant legally, Governor Rick Perry held a signing ceremony at an evangelical church in Fort Worth. [14]

Opponents

Shortly before the election, a Presbyterian minister in Austin, Tom Hegar, argued that "a liberal activist judge" might interpret the wording of Subsection (b) to outlaw marriage itself and said, "Don't risk it; vote against it." [15]

Attorney General Greg Abbott, however, defended the language of the amendment. [16] Proponents claimed that criticism of the amendment's language was a "smokescreen" to confuse voters on the issue. [12]

Pre-decision opinion polls

Many predicted Proposition 2 would pass, including opponents of Proposition 2. Supporters of Proposition 2, however, believed Texans might not vote because they will be overconfident after seeing landslide victories for marriage bans in other states. [17]

Results

Proposition 2,
"Definition of Marriage Act" [1] [2]
ChoiceVotes %
Check-71-128-204-brightblue.svg Yes1,723,78276.25
No536,91323.74
Total votes2,260,695100.00
Registered voters/turnout12,577,54517.97

Proposition 2 passed by a vote of more than three to one. With around 17.97 percent voter turnout, this was the highest participation in a constitutional amendment election since 1991, boasted by the same-sex marriage ban. Matt Foreman, executive director of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, said the outcome was not unexpected: "When you put a fundamental right of a minority up for popular vote, it's almost impossible to win."

County breakdown

Of Texas's 254 counties, 253 of the 254 voted in favor of Proposition 2. Travis County, which includes Austin, was the only county to oppose the amendment, with slightly under 60% of voters opposing it. [20] Houston and Dallas, the 6th and 8th cities with the largest LGBT populations in the US,[ citation needed ] voted for Proposition 2. The largest county in Texas, Harris, voted 72.5 percent to 27.5 percent for Proposition 2, with 17.5 percent voter turn out; however, two Montrose-area precincts of the county with substantial LGBT populations reported turnouts of around 35 percent. King County, the most Republican county in Texas,[ citation needed ] had the highest voter turnout of any county, with 54.16 percent, while Starr County, the most Democratic county in Texas,[ citation needed ] had the lowest voter turnout of any county, with 3.05 percent.

Of the counties containing the ten largest Texas cities, Houston, San Antonio, Dallas, Austin, Fort Worth, El Paso, Arlington, Corpus Christi, Plano, and Laredo, only Austin voted against Proposition 2. Of the counties containing the ten largest Texas universities, Texas A&M University, the University of Texas at Austin, the University of Houston, the University of North Texas, Texas State University–San Marcos, the University of Texas at Arlington, Texas Tech University, the University of Texas at San Antonio, the University of Texas at El Paso, and the University of Texas at Dallas, only the University of Texas at Austin voted against Proposition 2. Glen Maxey, the first openly gay member of the Texas House of Representatives, visited the University of Texas campus after the polls closed, where he said students voted more than 4-to-1 against the amendment. [16] Students at the University of Houston, University of North Texas, and Texas State University voted 2-to-1 against the amendment. [16] However students at Texas A&M University and Baylor University voted 6-to-1 in favor of the amendment. [16]

Effects

The amendment, which took effect on November 23, 2005, constitutionally banned same-sex marriages, which were never recognized by the state and was statutorily banned since 1973, and civil unions or civil union equivalents, which were never recognized by the state and was statutorily banned since 2003. Texas became the 18th US state to ban same-sex marriage in its constitution and 12th US state to ban civil unions or civil union equivalents in its constitution. 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 Texas Legislature from enacting a statute legalizing same-sex marriages or civil unions or civil union equivalents. Domestic partnerships in Texas, legal in 1 county and 2 municipalities at the time, were unaffected by the amendment.

In November 2009, Barbara Ann Radnofsky, a candidate for Texas Attorney General, claimed that the amendment, because it was poorly drafted, outlawed all marriage in Texas. [22]

The Williams Institute projected that legalizing same-sex marriage in Texas would add $182.5 million to the state's economy in the first three years. [23]

On October 1, 2009, a state district court judge in the case of In Re Marriage of J.B. and H.B. ruled the amendment unconstitutional under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution. The lawsuit was filed by two men living in Dallas who had married in Massachusetts in 2006. They were seeking a divorce in Texas because Massachusetts permits only state residents to sue for divorce. Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott and Governor Rick Perry appealed to the Fifth Court of Appeals in Dallas. On August 31, 2010, the appellate court reversed the district court, ruling that the amendment does not violate the U.S. Constitution and that district courts in Texas do not have subject-matter jurisdiction to hear a same-sex divorce case. [24]

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">2000 California Proposition 22</span> Referendum banning same-sex marriage

Proposition 22 was a law enacted by California voters in March 2000 stating that marriage was between one man and one woman. In November 2008, Proposition 8 was also passed by voters, again only allowing marriage between one man and one woman. The Act was proposed by means of the initiative process. It was authored by state Senator William "Pete" Knight and is known informally as the Knight initiative. Voters adopted the measure on March 7, 2000, with 61% in favor to 39% against. The margin of victory surprised many, since a Field Poll immediately prior to the election estimated support at 53%, with 40% against and 7% undecided.

Same-sex marriage has been legal in California since June 28, 2013. The State of California first issued marriage licenses to same-sex couples from June 16, 2008 to November 5, 2008, a period of approximately 4 months, 2 weeks and 6 days, as a result of the Supreme Court of California finding in the case of In re Marriage Cases that barring same-sex couples from marriage violated the Constitution of California. The issuance of such licenses was halted from November 5, 2008 through June 27, 2013 due to the passage of Proposition 8—a state constitutional amendment barring same-sex marriages. The granting of same-sex marriages recommenced following the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Hollingsworth v. Perry, which restored the effect of a federal district court ruling that overturned Proposition 8 as unconstitutional.

<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.

This is a list of notable events in the history of LGBT rights that took place in the year 2005.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2006 Arizona Proposition 107</span> Failed referendum on a statewide same-sex marriage ban

Arizona Proposition 107 was a proposed same-sex marriage ban, put before voters by ballot initiative in the 2006 general election. If passed, it would have prohibited the U.S. state of Arizona from recognizing same-sex marriages or civil unions. The state already had a statute defining marriage as the union of a man and a woman and prohibiting the recognition of same-sex marriages performed elsewhere.

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.

In response to court action in a number of states, the United States federal government and a number of state legislatures passed or attempted to pass legislation either prohibiting or allowing same-sex marriage or other types of same-sex unions.

<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">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">2008 California Proposition 8</span> Successful referendum on banning same-sex marriage

Proposition 8, known informally as Prop 8, was a California ballot proposition and a state constitutional amendment intended to ban same-sex marriage; it passed in the November 2008 California state elections and was later overturned in court. The proposition was created by opponents of same-sex marriage in advance of the California Supreme Court's May 2008 appeal ruling, In re Marriage Cases, which followed the short-lived 2004 same-sex weddings controversy and found the previous ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional. Proposition 8 was ultimately ruled unconstitutional by a federal court in 2010, although the court decision did not go into effect until June 26, 2013, following the conclusion of proponents' appeals.

<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">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.

Strauss v. Horton, 46 Cal. 4th 364, 93 Cal. Rptr. 3d 591, 207 P.3d 48 (2009), was a decision of the Supreme Court of California, the state's highest court. It resulted from lawsuits that challenged the voters' adoption of Proposition 8 on November 4, 2008, which amended the Constitution of California to outlaw same-sex marriage. Several gay couples and governmental entities filed the lawsuits in California state trial courts. The Supreme Court of California agreed to hear appeals in three of the cases and consolidated them so they would be considered and decided. The supreme court heard oral argument in the cases in San Francisco on March 5, 2009. Justice Kathryn Mickle Werdegar stated that the cases will set precedent in California because "no previous case had presented the question of whether [a ballot] initiative could be used to take away fundamental rights".

Same-sex marriage has been legal in Arizona since October 17, 2014. The U.S. state had denied marriage rights to same-sex couples by statute since 1996 and by an amendment to its State Constitution approved by voters in 2008. On October 17, Judge John W. Sedwick ruled in two lawsuits that Arizona's ban on same-sex marriage was unconstitutional, and enjoined the state from enforcing its ban, effective immediately. Attorney General Tom Horne said the state would not appeal that ruling, and instructed county clerks to comply and issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

The state of Texas, located in the south in the United States, contains a large community of LGBTQ+ citizens. More specifically, the city Austin, Texas has the third largest population of LGBTQ+ people based on the size of the city. Austin, Texas, and Texas in general, is home to several icons of the LGBTQ+ community such as Karamo Brown, co-founder of the LGBTQ+ group "Queer Eye" and Demi Lovato, a queer artist and activist. There is history of heavy violence against the LGBTQ+ community within Texas such as riots, as well as liberation and parades celebrating those within the community.

<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.

This article contains a timeline of significant events regarding same-sex marriage in the United States. On June 26, 2015, the landmark US Supreme Court decision in Obergefell v. Hodges effectively ended restrictions on same-sex marriage in the United States.

The U.S. state of Texas issues marriage licenses to same-sex couples and recognizes those marriages when performed out-of-state. On June 26, 2015, the United States legalized same-sex marriage nationwide due to the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Obergefell v. Hodges. Prior to the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling Article 1, Section 32, of the Texas Constitution provided 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." This amendment and all related statutes have been ruled unconstitutional and unenforceable. Some cities and counties in the state recognize both same-sex and opposite-sex domestic partnerships.

Same-sex marriage has been legal in Texas since the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges on June 26, 2015. Previously, the U.S. state of Texas had banned same-sex marriage both by statute since 1973 and in its State Constitution since 2005. On February 26, 2014, Judge Orlando Luis Garcia of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas found that Texas's ban on same-sex marriages was unconstitutional. On April 22, 2014, a state court came to the same conclusion. Both cases were appealed. The district court's decision was appealed to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, but before that court could issue a ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down all same-sex marriage bans in the United States in Obergefell on June 26, 2015. Within a few months of the court ruling, all counties had started issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples, except for Irion County, which announced in 2020 that it would begin issuing licenses to same-sex couples, making it the last county in the United States to comply with the ruling.

References

  1. 1 2 3 Office of the Secretary of State Archived 2014-01-09 at the Wayback Machine
  2. 1 2 "2005 Referendum Special Election Results – Texas"
  3. ↑ 2005 Constitutional Amendment Election
  4. ↑ 2005 - Special, November (Constitutional)
  5. ↑ "Prop 2 Letter" (PDF). Tessas Attourney General. October 27, 2005. Retrieved March 7, 2021.
  6. ↑ Article 1, Section 32, Texas Constitution, retrieved January 17, 2013
  7. ↑ Brown, Lyle C.; et al. Practicing Texas Politics (2011–2012 ed.). Boston, MA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning. p. 66.
  8. ↑ Texas Legislature Online: Bill: HJR 6, Legislative Session: 79(R), Enrolled, retrieved January 17, 2013
  9. ↑ "The Texas Constitution" . Retrieved March 7, 2021.
  10. ↑ "Ban on gay marriage heads to Texas Senate". Houston Chronicle. April 26, 2005. Retrieved March 8, 2013.
  11. ↑ "Same-sex marriage ban going to voters Nov. 8". Houston Chronicle. May 22, 2005. Retrieved March 8, 2013.
  12. 1 2 Hughes, Polly Ross (October 25, 2005). "Critics: Prop 2 threatens even traditional marriage". Houston Chronicle. Retrieved January 17, 2013.
  13. ↑ "BANNING SAME-SEX MARRIAGE" . Retrieved March 8, 2013.
  14. ↑ Blumenthal, Ralph (October 13, 2005). "In Texas, Marriage Is on Ballot". New York Times. Retrieved January 19, 2013.
  15. ↑ Smith, Amy (October 28, 2005), "Group Says Prop. 2 Could Make Straight Marriage Illegal", The Austin Chronicle , retrieved January 19, 2013
  16. 1 2 3 4 Elliott, Janet (November 9, 2005). "Gay marriage ban approved". Houston Chronicle. Retrieved January 17, 2013.
  17. ↑ "Texas Same-sex Marriage Fight Heats Up". New Standard News. October 26, 2005. Archived from the original on December 2, 2015. Retrieved January 19, 2013.
  18. ↑ "Expert expects Texas' Prop. 2 to pass". UNT News. November 10, 2005. Retrieved March 7, 2013.
  19. ↑ "Gay marriage vote crossed lines". Houston Chronicle. November 10, 2005. Retrieved March 7, 2013.
  20. ↑ Burka, Paul (January 2006). "The M Word". Texas Monthly . Retrieved April 7, 2020. Of course, I live in Travis County, the only county to vote down Prop 2. [...] Travis voted just a tick short of 60 percent against it.
  21. ↑ "2005 Referendum Special Election Data Graphs – Texas"
  22. ↑ Radnofsky, Barbara Ann (November 21, 2009). "Authors Of Texas Marriage Amendment: Who Barks The Loudest?". Huffington Post. Retrieved January 19, 2013.
  23. ↑ "TX losing $60 million annually due to ban on same-sex marriage". Dallas Voice. November 30, 2012. Archived from the original on December 5, 2012. Retrieved March 7, 2013.
  24. ↑ Appleton, Roy (August 31, 2010). "Dallas judge's ruling saying gay couple could divorce in Texas rejected on appeal". Dallas Morning News. Retrieved August 31, 2010.

Further reading

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.