History of marriage in California

Last updated

The recorded history of marriage in California is long and encompasses a period as far back as the first Spanish missions and even further back in unrecorded history of Indigenous Californians and their marriage history.

Contents

California Native American period

While the Native Americans of California did not document their culture in the same way western civilization did, we still have a great deal of knowledge from archaeological evidence as well as the earliest records of the Spanish missions.

Native communities in southern California of the Chumash Indians, practiced Matrilocal residence. The husband would move to the community of the wife. The exception to this rule being the chief, whose wife would move to live with the chiefs community. The chief was also the only one of the community with the option of multiple marriage. [1]

Jesuit Missionary period 1697–1767

The founding of the California missionary system by the Spanish began in 1697 located in Baja with the founding of Nuestra Senora de Loreto. Several times during the Jesuit period, Indians revolted against church doctrine against polygamy. [2]

Clemente Guillen, S. J., of Delores mission in Baja California reported in 1744 that he had destroyed the tables and paraphernalia of the Indian shaman and that same year Joseph de Torres Pereas noted the survival of marriage ceremonies indicated that shaman had been convincing adults not to accept baptism. [3]

California natives and the Spanish missions, 1785–1810

While the Franciscan Missions strived to incorporate the native California Indians into their fold, they worked hard to eliminate all marriage and family customs the Spanish Catholic Church disapproved of or found repugnant.

The church was anxious to legitimize the marriages of natives through Catholic ceremonies. Northern California Missions recorded the marriage of 2300 marriages of Native Americans previously joined by native custom with five thousand new unions and ten thousand neophyte widows and widower remarried. [4]

Marriage between native Indian woman and Spanish men was encouraged by the California missions to increase the population and Spanish political power. Rape and other forms of violence was however a concern. Spanish Soldiers and settlers of a patriarchal colonial society put native woman in a vulnerable state. [5]

Author, Charles Francis Saunders has documented the details of a California Mission wedding ceremony from the 1890s in his book, "Capistrano Nights – Tales of a California Mission Town". [6]

1829 Carrillo-Fitch elopement

Josefa Carrillo Fitch Josefa Carrillo Fitch.jpg
Josefa Carrillo Fitch
Henry Delano Fitch Henry Delano Fitch.jpg
Henry Delano Fitch

In 1829 a controversy erupted when the Spanish Governor was asked to intervene in the marriage between a local San Diego Spanish woman and a foreigner. [7]

Maria Antonia Natalia Elija Carrillo was born November 27, 1810. Called Josefa, after her grandmother, she was the eldest of thirteen children born to Maria Ygnacia Lopez and Joaquin Victor Carrillo. [8] Influential and socially well connected, the family was related to several other prominent Californians of the day. At the time the youth of California were pressured to marry early.

Instead of marrying another Californian, Carrillo fell in love with American merchant seaman, Henry Delano Fitch. Fitch formally requested the hand of Maria Antonia in 1827.

On April 15, 1829, the ceremony was in progress, but was stopped by order of Governor Jose Maria Echeandia. It is believed that the Governor was enraged by Carrillo's choice of a man who refused to naturalize as a citizen, as well as rumored smuggling activity.

The couple eloped in Valparaiso Chile and upon returning to California 1830, Echeandia announced the marriage as "Illegal" and had Fitch imprisoned and placed Carrillo in Deposito, the practice of separating couples to ascertain if they married of their own accord.

Carrillo was held in San Gabriel and Fitch in Monterrey. In December 1830, ecclesiastic authorities found the marriage valid but not legitimate under canon law. To end the scandal, the couple was ordered to pay penance in the order of attending special mass and reciting prayer.

1850 statehood to 1872

On September 8, 1850, California entered the US as the 31st state of the union. At the time marriage statutes described marriage as "a civil contract to which the consent of the parties is required" [9] with gender specific pronouns applied to "husband" and "wife". Later court decisions and some statutes dating from both statehood and the 1872 codification of the civil law state; "Any unmarried male of the age of 18 years or upward and any unmarried female of the age of 15 years old or upward are capable of consenting to and consummating marriage." [10] [11] The code makes no mention of what gender may marry which.

Interracial bans

In 1850, "all marriages of white persons with Negroes or mulattoes [were] declared to be illegal and void". This stricture held until 1948, at which point the California Supreme Court became the first state court in the country to strike down a law prohibiting interracial marriage, recognizing marriage as a fundamental right:

Marriage is thus something more than a civil contract subject to regulation by the state; it is a fundamental right of free men. There can be no prohibition of marriage except for an important social objective and by reasonable means. No law within the broad areas of state interest may be unreasonably discriminatory or arbitrary. ... The right to marry is as fundamental as the right to send one's child to a particular school or the right to have offspring. Indeed, "We are dealing here with legislation which involves one of the basic civil rights of man. Marriage and procreation are fundamental to the very existence and survival of the race." (Skinner v. Oklahoma, supra, at p. 541.) Legislation infringing such rights must be based upon more than prejudice and must be free from oppressive discrimination to comply with the constitutional requirements of due process and equal protection of the laws. [12]

Poorly kept records

While the state required records be kept on marriage certificates and contracts as early as 1851, it wasn't until 1858 that any further information was kept, such as births, divorce and death. [13] At that time the office of the state Registrar was created.

Contemporary same-sex history

In 1971, Gov. Ronald Reagan signed legislation making civil nuptials gender-neutral under the law as part of the Women's Liberation Movement in California.

In 1977, Asb. Bruce Nestande (R- Orange County) wrote AB 607 at the behest of the Orange County Clerks Association to exclude same sex couples from civil marriage.

In 2000, The Knight Initiative (Prop 22; CA DOMA) passes with 61.2% of the vote.

In 2001, same-sex couples (including Davina Kotulski and Molly McKay) from Marriage Equality USA began asking for marriage licenses in Los Angeles and San Francisco. The issue of same-sex marriage reemerged in 2004, when Mayor of San Francisco Gavin Newsom directed the city-county clerk to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, citing the California Constitution's guarantee of equal protection under the law to all groups. The marriages were quickly annulled by the California Supreme Court, and the city of San Francisco issued a legal challenge that was consolidated with other challenges to California's marriage laws. Meanwhile, the California legislature twice passed, and twice received vetoes from governor Arnold Schwarzenegger on, bills that would have legalized same-sex marriages in the state.

On May 15, 2008, at a time when only the Massachusetts Supreme Court had ruled favorably on same-sex marriage, the California Supreme Court ruled on the 2004 San Franciscan challenge with other cases in the watershed In re Marriage Cases. Applying strict scrutiny to the state's discrimination between heterosexual and other citizens, marriage was found to be a fundamental right that may not be denied based on sexual orientation, and the relevant laws were struck down.

Social conservatives and other dissenters capitalized on the case to renew its thrice-unsuccessful push to amend the Constitution of California to restrict marriage to being between opposite-sex couples, and with unprecedented support from the Catholic and LDS churches, succeeded by a slim margin of votes. One year later, the proposition was verified as legal by the California Supreme Court, but not held to be retroactive, so the state of California only recognizes opposite-sex marriages, except for the same-sex marriages granted before the constitutional change in 2008 (including 18,000 marriages granted by California and possibly same-sex marriages granted by other jurisdictions before that date, although a test case has not yet arisen). Prop 8 was eventually overturned by the United States District Court for the Northern District of California but a stay was placed on same sex marriages until an appeal could be heard by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Both, Governor Jerry Brown and Attorney General, Kamala Harris had declined to defend the proposition during the appeals process, so the Ninth Circuit allowed the proponents of the amendment to stand for the state government and appeal the decision. The Ninth Circuit affirmed the ruling of the district court in 2012, and the amendment's proponents appealed to the United States Supreme Court. On June 26, 2013, the Supreme Court ruled 5–4 in Hollingsworth v. Perry that the appellants had no standing to appeal. They remanded the case to the Ninth Circuit and vacated their ruling, leaving only the district court's ruling stand. Same-sex marriages resumed two days later when the Ninth Circuit lifted the stay on the district court's ruling.

Related Research Articles

Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967), was a landmark civil rights decision of the U.S. Supreme Court which ruled that laws banning interracial marriage violate the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Beginning in 2013, the decision was cited as precedent in U.S. federal court decisions ruling that restrictions on same-sex marriage in the United States were unconstitutional, including in the Supreme Court decision Obergefell v. Hodges (2015).

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 and 20 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.

Same-sex marriage has been legal in Florida since January 6, 2015, as a result of a ruling in Brenner v. Scott from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida. The court ruled the state's same-sex marriage ban unconstitutional on August 21, 2014. The order was stayed temporarily. State attempts at extending the stay failed, with the U.S. Supreme Court denying further extension on December 19, 2014. In addition, a state court ruling in Pareto v. Ruvin allowed same-sex couples to obtain marriage licenses in Miami-Dade County on the afternoon of January 5, 2015. In another state case challenging the state's denial of marriage rights to same-sex couples, a Monroe County court in Huntsman v. Heavilin stayed enforcement of its decision pending appeal and the stay expired on January 6, 2015. Florida was the 35th U.S. state to legalize same-sex marriage.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Same-sex marriage in Hawaii</span>

Same-sex marriage has been legal in Hawaii since December 2, 2013. The Hawaii State Legislature held a special session beginning on October 28, 2013, and passed the Hawaii Marriage Equality Act legalizing same-sex marriage. Governor Neil Abercrombie signed the legislation on November 13, and same-sex couples began marrying on December 2. Hawaii also allows both same-sex and opposite-sex couples to formalize their relationships legally in the form of civil unions and reciprocal beneficiary relationships. Civil unions provide the same rights, benefits, and obligations of marriage at the state level, while reciprocal beneficiary relationships provide a more limited set of rights. Hawaii was the fifteenth U.S. state to legalize same-sex marriage.

This is a list of notable events in the history of LGBT rights that took place in the year 2008.

<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.

Same-sex marriage has been legally recognized in Nevada since October 9, 2014, when a federal district court judge issued an injunction against enforcement of Nevada's same-sex marriage ban, acting on order from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. A unanimous three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit had ruled two days earlier that the state's ban on same-sex marriage was unconstitutional. Same-sex marriage was previously banned by an amendment to the Constitution of Nevada approved in 2002. The statutory and constitutional bans were repealed in 2017 and 2020, respectively.

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.

Same-sex marriage has been recognized in Montana since a federal district court ruled the state's ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional on November 19, 2014. Montana had previously denied marriage rights to same-sex couples by statute since 1997 and in its State Constitution since 2004. The state appealed the ruling to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, but before that court could hear the case, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down all same-sex marriage bans in the country in Obergefell v. Hodges, mooting any remaining appeals.

Same-sex marriage has been legal in Louisiana since the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges on June 26, 2015. The court held that the denial of marriage rights to same-sex couples is unconstitutional, invalidating Louisiana's ban on same-sex marriage. The ruling clarified conflicting court rulings on whether state officials are obligated to license same-sex marriages. Governor Bobby Jindal confirmed on June 28 that Louisiana would comply with the ruling once the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed its decision in a Louisiana case, which the Fifth Circuit did on July 1. Jindal then said the state would not comply with the ruling until the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana reversed its judgment, which it did on July 2. All parishes now issue marriage licenses in accordance with federal law.

Hollingsworth v. Perry was a series of United States federal court cases that re-legalized same-sex marriage in the state of California. The case began in 2009 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, which found that banning same-sex marriage violates equal protection under the law. This decision overturned California ballot initiative Proposition 8, which had banned same-sex marriage. After the State of California refused to defend Proposition 8, the official sponsors of Proposition 8 intervened and appealed to the Supreme Court. The case was litigated during the governorships of both Arnold Schwarzenegger and Jerry Brown, and was thus known as Perry v. Schwarzenegger and Perry v. Brown, respectively. As Hollingsworth v. Perry, it eventually reached the United States Supreme Court, which held that, in line with prior precedent, the official sponsors of a ballot initiative measure did not have Article III standing to appeal an adverse federal court ruling when the state refused to do so.

Same-sex marriage has been legally recognized in Alaska since October 12, 2014, with an interruption from October 15 to 17 while state officials sought without success to delay the implementation of a federal court ruling. The U.S. District Court for the District of Alaska held on October 12 in the case of Hamby v. Parnell that Alaska's statutory and constitutional bans on same-sex marriage violated the Due Process and Equal Protection clauses of the U.S. Constitution. On October 15, state officials obtained a two-day stay from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which the U.S. Supreme Court refused to extend on October 17. Although Alaska is one of a few states which enforces a three-day waiting period between requesting a marriage license and conducting a marriage ceremony, at least one same-sex couple had the waiting period waived immediately after the district court's ruling. They married in Utqiagvik on October 13 and were the first same-sex couple to marry in Alaska.

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.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">History of gay men in the United States</span>

This article addresses the history of gay men in the United States. Unless otherwise noted, the members of same-sex male couples discussed here are not known to be gay, but they are mentioned as part of discussing the practice of male homosexuality—that is, same-sex male sexual and romantic behavior.

Same-sex marriage has been legally recognized in Idaho since October 15, 2014. In May 2014, the U.S. District Court for the District of Idaho found Idaho's statutory and state constitutional bans on same-sex marriage unconstitutional in the case of Latta v. Otter, but enforcement of that ruling was stayed pending appeal. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed that ruling on October 7, 2014, though the U.S. Supreme Court issued a stay of the ruling, which was not lifted until October 15, 2014.

Same-sex marriage has been legal in South Dakota since June 26, 2015 when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Obergefell v. Hodges that the U.S. Constitution guarantees same-sex couples the right to marry. Attorney General Marty Jackley issued a statement critical of the ruling but said South Dakota is obligated to comply and the state would recognize same-sex marriages.

Same-sex marriage has been legal in Virginia since October 6, 2014, following the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court not to hear an appeal of the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals' ruling in Bostic v. Schaefer. Same-sex marriages subsequently began at 1:00 p.m. on October 6 after the Fourth Circuit issued its mandate, and since then Virginia has performed legal marriages of same-sex couples and recognized out-of-state same-sex marriages. Previously, the state had passed a statute prohibiting same-sex marriage in 1975, and further restrictions were added in 1997 and 2004, which made "void and unenforceable" any arrangements between same-sex couples bestowing the "privileges or obligations of marriage". Voters approved an amendment to the Constitution of Virginia reinforcing the existing laws in 2006. On January 14, 2014, a U.S. district court judge ruled in Bostic that Virginia's statutory and constitutional ban on the state recognition of same-sex marriages were unconstitutional, a decision upheld by the Fourth Circuit on July 28, 2014.

<i>Latta v. Otter</i> United States federal legal case

Latta v. Otter is a case initiated in 2013 in U.S. federal court by plaintiffs seeking to prevent the state of Idaho from enforcing its ban on same-sex marriage. The plaintiffs won in U.S. District Court. The case was appealed to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which heard this together with two related cases–Jackson v. Abercrombie, and Sevcik v. Sandoval.

Same-sex marriage has been legal in Puerto Rico since July 13, 2015, as a result of the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Obergefell v. Hodges. On June 26, 2015, the court ruled that bans on same-sex marriage are unconstitutional under the Due Process and Equal Protection clauses of the United States Constitution. Same-sex couples could begin applying for marriage licenses on July 13, and the first marriages occurred on July 17, 2015.

References

  1. ↑ Peregrine, Peter Neal; Ember, Melvin, eds. (2003). Encyclopedia of Prehistory. Vol. 4 : North America. Springer. p. 302. ISBN   978-0-306-46264-1.{{cite encyclopedia}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)
  2. ↑ Cummings, Itoi, Joe, Nikki (2007). Moon Baja . Avalon Travel Publishing. pp.  470. ISBN   978-1-56691-800-8.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  3. ↑ Jackson, Robert H. (2000). From savages to subjects. M.E. Sharpe. p. 65. ISBN   978-0-7656-0597-9.
  4. ↑ Hurtado, Albert L. (1990). Indian Survival on the California Frontier. Yale University Press. p. 23. ISBN   978-0-300-04798-1.
  5. ↑ Lake, Alison (2006). Colonial rosary. Ohio University Press. p. 80. ISBN   978-0-8040-1084-9.
  6. ↑ Saunders, Charles Francis (2007). Capistrano Nights – Tales of a California Mission Town. Saunders Press. pp. 15–19. ISBN   978-1-4067-5693-7.
  7. ↑ Sánchez, Rosaura (1995). Telling identities . University of Minnesota Press. pp.  212. ISBN   978-0-8166-2559-8.
  8. ↑ Ruíz, Korrol, Vickie, Virginia Sánchez (2006). Latinas in the United States. Indiana University Press. p. 122. ISBN   978-0-253-34681-0.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  9. ↑ "The Statutes of California passed at the First Session of the Legislature, J Winchester, Publisher 1850"
  10. ↑ IGS Library staff. "Same-Sex Marriage in California – Overview and Issues". UC Berkeley, Institute of Governmental Studies. Archived from the original on 2008-06-12. Retrieved 2008-10-18.
  11. ↑ In re Marriage Cases , 143Cal. App. 4th873 .
  12. ↑ Perez v. Sharp , 32Cal.2d711 , 714–715(1948).
  13. ↑ Coy, Francis, Owen, John (2009). The Care and Use of the County Archives of California. Kessinger Publishing, LLC. p. 66. ISBN   978-978-110-448-0.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
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.