Oregon Ballot Measure 58 (1998)

Last updated

Ballot Measure 58 was a citizen's initiative that was passed by the voters of the U.S. state of Oregon in the November 1998 General Election. The measure restored the right of adopted adults who were born in Oregon to access their original birth certificates. The measure passed with 609,268 votes in favor, 454,122 against. It was immediately challenged by several birth mothers who had put children up for adoption, which delayed instituting the measure for a year and a half.

Initiative means by which a petition signed by a certain minimum number of registered voters can force a public vote

In political science, an initiative is a means by which a petition signed by a certain minimum number of registered voters can force a public vote in parliament called an indirect initiative or via a direct initiative, the latter then being dubbed a Popular initiated Referendum.

U.S. state constituent political entity of the United States

In the United States, a state is a constituent political entity, of which there are currently 50. Bound together in a political union, each state holds governmental jurisdiction over a separate and defined geographic territory and shares its sovereignty with the federal government. Due to this shared sovereignty, Americans are citizens both of the federal republic and of the state in which they reside. State citizenship and residency are flexible, and no government approval is required to move between states, except for persons restricted by certain types of court orders. Four states use the term commonwealth rather than state in their full official names.

Oregon State of the United States of America

Oregon is a state in the Pacific Northwest region on the West Coast of the United States. The Columbia River delineates much of Oregon's northern boundary with Washington, while the Snake River delineates much of its eastern boundary with Idaho. The parallel 42° north delineates the southern boundary with California and Nevada. Oregon is one of only three states of the contiguous United States to have a coastline on the Pacific Ocean.

Contents

Text

Upon receipt of a written application to the state registrar, any adopted person 21 years of age and older born in the state of Oregon shall be issued a certified copy of his/her unaltered, original and unamended certificate of birth in the custody of the state registrar, with procedures, filing fees, and waiting periods identical to those imposed upon non-adopted citizens of the State of Oregon pursuant to ORS 432.120 and 432.146. Contains no exceptions. [1]

On December 1, 1998, a group of birth mothers, represented by attorney Franklin Hunsaker, filed a lawsuit to seek an injunction. Marion County Oregon circuit court judge Albin W. Norblad granted an injunction halting the implementation of Measure 58. Judge Norblad later recused himself from the case and was replaced by Judge Paul Lipscomb.

Marion County, Oregon County in the United States

Marion County is a county located in the U.S. state of Oregon. The population was 315,335 at the 2010 census, making it the fifth-most populous county in Oregon. The county seat is Salem, the state capital. The county was originally named the Champooick District, after Champoeg, a meeting place on the Willamette River. On September 3, 1849, the territorial legislature renamed it in honor of Francis Marion, a Continental Army general from South Carolina who served in the American Revolutionary War.

Oregon's circuit courts are general jurisdiction trial courts of the U.S. state of Oregon. These courts hear civil and criminal court cases.

Albin Walter Norblad III was an attorney in the U.S. state of Oregon, and a judge of the Oregon Circuit Court for the 3rd judicial district, in Marion County at Salem. He was named for his father, A. Walter Norblad, and grandfather, A. W. Norblad, both prominent Oregon attorneys and politicians.

In his decision, Judge Lipscomb upheld Measure 58, ruling the Oregon Constitution held no promise of secrecy to women who gave their children up for adoption. "Plaintiffs have failed to demonstrate either any contractual right to absolute privacy or confidentiality, or any impermissible impairment of any such rights."

The Oregon Court of Appeals issued a temporary injunction on July 30, 1999. A deadline of August 4 was set for oral arguments in the case. On August 13, the court issued another 90-day stay while it reviewed a constitutional challenge. Yet another stay was granted on September 7, 1999 extending through January 31, 2000.

Oral arguments were heard on November 22, 1999 before the Oregon Court of Appeals, which on December 29 upheld the lower court's decision regarding access to adoptees birth records. [2]

The court of appeals again issued a seven-day stay on December 30, 1999, to allow the plaintiffs to file an emergency appeal to the Oregon Supreme Court. On January 6, 2000, the Oregon Supreme Court ruled that the emergency stay would continue indefinitely. The court declined to hear the case without comment on March 20, 2000 and continued a 21-day stay to give the birth mothers a chance to appeal to the Supreme Court of the United States. The stays were granted four more times, postponing implementation until May 30, 2000.

Supreme Court of the United States Highest court in the United States

The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) is the highest court in the federal judiciary of the United States. Established pursuant to Article III of the U.S. Constitution in 1789, it has original jurisdiction over a narrow range of cases, including suits between two or more states and those involving ambassadors. It also has ultimate appellate jurisdiction over all federal court and state court cases that involve a point of federal constitutional or statutory law. The Court has the power of judicial review, the ability to invalidate a statute for violating a provision of the Constitution or an executive act for being unlawful. However, it may act only within the context of a case in an area of law over which it has jurisdiction. The court may decide cases having political overtones, but it has ruled that it does not have power to decide nonjusticiable political questions.

In the final two legal battles over Measure 58, the birth mothers were denied a motion to reconsider by the Oregon Supreme Court on May 16, 2000. Also on May 23, 2000 the Oregon Supreme Court refused to extend the stay against the new law. The legal battle ended on May 30, 2000, when Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor denied a request for a stay.

Time Line

1998

May 22, Supporters of the initiative petition to allow adoptees unseal their birth records turned in 86,422 signatures turned into the Oregon Secretary of State.

July 9, Ballot Measure 58 qualifies with 73,261 signatures.

August 26, Willamette Week publishes a story advocating passage of Measure 58 as a fight for civil rights. [3]

September 2, Then Governor of Oregon John Kitzhaber states he opposes the measure. [4]

September 16, Willamette Week publishes story, "Bastard: Adoption in America" which chronicles one persons struggle to find answers about their adoption. [5]

September 23, The Oregonian publishes a column stating that oppose the measure due to privacy concerns.

October 12, Oregon's Secretary of State publishes the Voter's Pamphlet listing arguments both for and against Measure 58. [1]

October 14, Willamette Week publishes an editorial in support of Measure 58. [6]

November 1, An ad appears in The Oregonian that lists the names of 500 birth mothers who support the measure.

November 3, Ballot Measure 58 is passed by the voters 57% to 43%. [7]

December 1, Marion County Circuit Judge Albin W. Norblad grants an injunction halting implementation of Measure 58 as a result of a lawsuit filed by Franklin Hunsaker, on behalf of four anonymous birth mothers.

December 9, Three private parties, including Helen Hill, Chief Petitioner for Measure 58, Curtis Endicott, a St. Helens adoptee, and Susan Updike of Scappoose, a birth mother—and one organization, the Oregon Adoptive Rights Association, seek intervenor status in the Measure 58 lawsuit. Intervenor status would allow them to cross-examine witnesses, examine evidence, and participate in some court activities. These parties are represented in court by Portland attorney Thomas E. McDermott.

December 18, Three more anonymous birth mothers are added as plaintiffs in an amended complaint.

1999

January 19, Judge Norblad hears arguments over granting intervenor status, and hears discussion of procedural issues for protecting plaintiff birth mothers' anonymity. Hearing scheduled for January 28 on the procedural issues.

January 22, Intervenor is status granted to Helen Hill, Curtis Endicott, Susan Updike, and the Oregon Adoptive Rights Association.

April 1, Birth Mother drops out of lawsuit. Jane Doe 3 withdraws as a plaintiff from the case, for reasons not given.

June 17, Judge Norblad recuses himself from the case, which will be taken over by presiding Judge Paul Lipscomb.

July 12, Then Governor Kitzhaber signed into law today HB 3194, an amendment to Measure 58 to provide for a voluntary "Contact Preference Form" to be attached to the original birth certificate. The bill leaves untouched the rights of adoptees and respects the spirit of Measure 58 while alleviating concerns about its "fairness". It is unanimously supported by supporters as well as opponents of Measure 58.

July 15, After the hearing on Wednesday July 14, Judge Lipscomb promises a decision possibly as soon as Friday July 16

July 16, Judge Lipscomb today upheld Measure 58, saying the Oregon Constitution held no promise of secrecy to women who gave their children up for adoption.

"Plaintiffs have failed to demonstrate either any contractual right to absolute privacy or confidentiality, or any impermissible impairment of any such rights."

July 17, The six anonymous birth mothers and their attorney promise to file an appeal of Judge Lipscomb's decision.

July 20, Adoptees begin filing requests with the state office of vital records in anticipation of the lifting of the injunction against Measure 58.

July 21, A Willamette Week article, Open Sesame, profiles Helen Hill's long involvement in the M58 campaign, and her jubilation at Judge Lipscomb's decision.

July 22, The six anonymous birth mothers file a motion with the Oregon Supreme Court to continue the injunction against Measure 58.

July 23, The State of Oregon's Archive Division gears up for an onrush of requests from adoptees requesting their original birth certificates.

July 27, In a telephone conference today with lawyers, Judge Lipscomb refused to suspend his decision upholding Measure 58. However, attorneys for opponents of the law have said they will ask the Oregon Court of Appeals for a stay to continue to prevent it from taking effect while they appeal the case to that court. They will have about two days to file that motion before the State of Oregon files an order and the circuit court decision takes effect.

July 30, The Oregon Court of Appeals on Friday issued a temporary stay to prevent Measure 58 from taking effect, while it considers whether to continue blocking the law during an appeal. The appeals court gave the state until August 12 to respond.

August 4, The Oregon Appeals Court has set a deadline of August 12 for arguments to be submitted on the issue of extending the stay on Measure 58 pending a new appeal. Until then, Measure 58 is still on hold.

August 13, State appeals court puts adoption law on hold another 90 days. The Oregon Appeals Court today issued a new 90-day stay on Measure 58 while it reviews the constitutional challenges.

September 7, The Oregon Court of Appeals extended their stay of Measure 58 through January 31, 2000. Chief Judge Mary Deits said the court will hear oral arguments on November 22.

September 11, Adoptee Rights Spokesman Dies Waiting for Measure to Take Effect. Curtis Endicott died of a lifelong, undiagnosed lung ailment at age 51, while waiting for Oregon's successful Adoptee Rights Initiative (Measure 58) to take effect

November 22, The Oregon State Court of Appeals hold oral arguments in Measure 58 case.

December 29, Appeals court upholds adoption records access. [8]

December 30, The Court of Appeals has issued a seven-day further stay, to allow the plaintiffs to file an emergency appeal to the Oregon Supreme Court to review the case and to impose a longer stay while the appeals process is pursued.

On the same day, the Bureau of Vital Statistics has been ordered to immediately stop processing Oregon adoptees' requests for birth certificates.

2000

January 5, Franklin Hunsaker, attorney for the six plaintiffs, files an emergency appeal of the Appeals Court ruling to the Oregon Supreme Court. The Oregonian reports Birth mothers seek hold on law

January 6, Oregon Supreme Court ruled that the seven day stay granted by the Court of Appeals on December 30 will continue indefinitely.

March 20, Oregon Supreme Court lets Measure 58 stand. The Oregon Supreme Court today declined without comment to hear the appeal challenging Measure 58. The Court continued a stay suspending the law for 21 more days, allowing the plaintiffs to ask the Court to reconsider, or to file an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.

April 5, As the 21-day stay granted by the Oregon Supreme Court approaches expiration, plaintiffs' attorney Hunsaker asked the court for another 21-day stay to allow more time to file an appeal.

April 10, The Oregon State Supreme Court has granted another 21-day stay till May 2 to allow plaintiffs' attorney Franklin Hunsaker more time to file a motion for reconsideration.

May 2, The Oregon State Supreme Court has granted yet another stay while it considers a motion filed today by attorney Franklin Hunsaker asking that the Supreme Court itself should rule, not just let the lower court decision stand.

May 16, The Oregon Supreme Court today denied without comment a motion to reconsider its decision to let stand an appellate court ruling that upheld the legality of Measure 58. Yet another stay has been granted however until May 30 to allow the challengers of the measure to appeal to the United States Supreme Court.

May 19, Franklin Hunsaker filed a motion with the Oregon Court of Appeals to stay enforcement of Measure 58 until the U.S. Supreme Court can rule on the plaintiff's petition for certiorari. The Appeals Court asked for opposing arguments to the motion from The Attorney General's office and intervenors' attorneys McDermott and Pulvers.

May 23, The Oregon Court of Appeals denied a motion by Hunsaker to extend a stay against Measure 58. Plaintiffs next step is to seek a stay from a justice of The U.S. Supreme Court to allow time to file an appeal there. All challenges to Measure 58 at the state level are exhausted.

May 25, An AP news story, "Oregon Adoptees To Get Records", notes that unless the Supreme Court agrees to hear a constitutional challenge to Measure 58, the measure will go into effect on Tuesday May 30 at 5:01 p.m.

May 30, Supreme Court Justice O'Connor denies request to stay Measure 58. Plaintiff's attorney Franklin Hunsaker has appealed at the last minute to Justice Thomas, who has not responded yet. Although Court rules allow this, such moves are not favored, and would usually need a majority vote of the full court to be accepted. Measure 58 goes into effect at 5:01 p.m.

See also

Related Research Articles

Same-sex marriage has been legally recognized in the U.S. state of Colorado since October 7, 2014.

The U.S. state of Montana has recognized same-sex marriage since a federal court ruled the state's ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional on November 19, 2014. It 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, mooting any remaining appeals.

The U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges on June 26, 2015, held that the denial of marriage rights to same-sex couples is unconstitutional, invalidating the ban on same-sex marriage in the U.S. state of Louisiana. The ruling clarified conflicting court rulings on whether Louisianian 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 federal District Court reversed its judgment, which it did on July 2. All parishes now issue marriage licenses in accordance with federal law.

Same-sex marriage has been legal in the U.S. state of Alabama since June 26, 2015, after the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges. However, as of December 2018, eight counties in Alabama do not issue marriage licenses to any couples in order to avoid issuing them to same-sex couples.

American Foundation for Equal Rights

The American Foundation for Equal Rights (AFER) is a nonprofit organization established in 2009 to support the plaintiffs in Hollingsworth v. Perry, a federal lawsuit challenging California's Proposition 8 under the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. AFER retained former United States Solicitor General Theodore B. Olson and David Boies to lead the legal team representing the plaintiffs challenging Proposition 8.

<i>Hedges v. Obama</i>

Hedges v. Obama was a lawsuit filed in January 2012 against the Obama administration and members of the U.S. Congress by a group including former New York Times reporter and current Truthdig columnist Christopher Hedges, challenging the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (NDAA). The legislation permitted the U.S. government to indefinitely detain people "who are part of or substantially support Al Qaeda, the Taliban or associated forces engaged in hostilities against the United States". The plaintiffs contended that Section 1021(b)(2) of the law allows for detention of citizens and permanent residents taken into custody in the U.S. on "suspicion of providing substantial support" to groups engaged in hostilities against the U.S. such as al-Qaeda and the Taliban respectively that the NDAA arms the U.S. military with the ability to imprison indefinitely journalists, activists and human-rights workers based on vague allegations.

Same-sex marriage is legal in the U.S. state of South Dakota. The United States Supreme Court ruled in Obergefell v. Hodges on June 26, 2015, that there is a constitutional right to same-sex marriage. Attorney General Marty Jackley issued a statement critical of the ruling but said South Dakota is obligated to comply with it.

Same-sex marriage has been legally recognised in the U.S. state of Nebraska since June 26, 2015, when the U.S. Supreme Court in the case of Obergefell v. Hodges ruled the denial of marriage rights to same-sex couples unconstitutional. Following the Court's ruling, the Attorney General of Nebraska announced that the state would comply with the ruling.

Same-sex marriage became legal in the U.S. state of Kansas following the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Obergefell v. Hodges on June 26, 2015, which found the denial of marriage rights to same-sex couples unconstitutional. By June 30, all 31 judicial districts and all 105 Kansas counties were issuing licenses to same-sex couples or had agreed to do so. Kansas state agencies initially delayed recognition of same-sex marriages for purposes including but not limited to changing names, ascribing health benefits and filing joint tax returns, but began doing so on July 6.

Tanco v. Haslam was the lead case in the dispute of same-sex marriage in Tennessee. A U.S. District Court granted a preliminary injunction requiring the state to recognize the marriages of the plaintiffs, three same-sex couples. The court found the equal protection analysis used in Bourke v. Beshear, a case dealing with a comparable Kentucky statute "especially persuasive." On April 25, 2014, that injunction was stayed by the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. Tanco was appealed to the Sixth Circuit, which reversed the district court and upheld Tennessee's refusal to recognize same-sex marriages from other jurisdictions on November 6.

<i>Geiger v. Kitzhaber</i>

Geiger v. Kitzhaber is a decision by the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon that requires Oregon to allow same-sex couples to marry and to recognize same-sex marriages established in other jurisdictions. The decision arose from two consolidated cases that alleged that Oregon's constitutional ban on same-sex marriage, Article 15, § 5, and all related marriage statutes, violate the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution. Among the several defendants, Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum filed appearances in the case to defend Oregon's position, but declined to defend the constitutionality of the bans and ordered state agencies to recognize the validity of same-sex marriages established elsewhere.

Same-sex marriage is legal in the U.S. state of Mississippi. On November 25, 2014, U.S. District Court Judge Carlton W. Reeves of the District Court for Southern Mississippi, ruled Mississippi's ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional. Enforcement of his ruling was stayed pending appeal to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. On June 26, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Obergefell v. Hodges that the denial of marriage rights to same-sex couples is unconstitutional. On June 29, the State Attorney General ordered clerks to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. On July 1, the Fifth Circuit lifted its stay and Judge Reeves ordered an end to Mississippi's enforcement of its same-sex marriage ban. However, until July 2, 2015, several counties in Mississippi continued to refuse to issue same-sex couple marriage licenses, including DeSoto, Jasper, Jones, Newton, Pontotoc, Simpson and Yalobusha.

<i>Wright v. Arkansas</i>

Wright v. Arkansas is a same-sex marriage case pending before the Arkansas Supreme Court. An Arkansas Circuit Court judge ruled the Arkansas Constitution's ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional on May 9, 2014. He clarified his opinion to include state statutes that interfered with allowing or recognizing same-sex marriage as well. The state Supreme Court issued a stay in the case on May 16, 2014, but approximately 450 same-sex marriage licenses were issued before the stay went into effect.

<i>De Leon v. Perry</i> federal lawsuit challenging Texas marriage law

De Leon v. Perry was a federal lawsuit challenging Texas marriage law, specifically the state's constitutional ban on same-sex marriage and corresponding statutes. A U.S. district court ruled in favor of the plaintiff same-sex couples on February 26, 2014, granting their motion for a preliminary injunction. The state defendants filed an interlocutory appeal before the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, as the disposition on the motion was not a final ruling in the case. On April 14, 2014, the plaintiffs filed a motion for an expedited hearing, which was denied on May 21, 2014. The plaintiffs filed another motion for an expedited hearing on October 6, 2014, after the Supreme Court of the United States denied appeals in other marriage equality cases, and the motion was granted on October 7, 2014, setting a hearing for November 2014. However, on October 27, 2014, the Fifth Circuit set oral arguments for January 9, 2015.

<i>Baskin v. Bogan</i>

Baskin v. Bogan, the lead Indiana case challenging that state's denial of marriage rights to same-sex couples, was filed in federal district court on March 12, 2014, naming several government officials as defendants. Chief Judge Richard L. Young found for the plaintiffs on June 25. A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit upheld the district court ruling in a unanimous decision on September 4.

<i>Burns v. Hickenlooper</i>

Burns v. Hickenlooper is a lawsuit filed on July 1, 2014, in federal district court in Colorado, challenging that state's denial of marriage rights to same-sex couples. The plaintiffs' complaint alleged that the defendants have violated the Fourteenth Amendment by denying plaintiffs the fundamental right of marriage. The defendants agreed with the substance of the plaintiffs' case, but asked the district court to stay implementation of any order requiring Colorado to alter enforcement of its ban pending the outcome of other litigation. After the district court declined to grant more than a one-month stay on July 23, the state's governor and attorney general appealed and won a stay from the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals on August 21. Following U.S. Supreme Court action in other cases, on October 8 they asked the Tenth Circuit to dismiss their appeal and lift the stay, which would effectively legalize same-sex marriage in Colorado.

In Brenner v. Scott and its companion case, Grimsley v. Scott, a U.S. district court found Florida's constitutional and statutory same-sex marriage bans unconstitutional. On August 21, 2014, the court issued a preliminary injunction that prevents that state from enforcing its bans and then stayed its injunction until stays are lifted in the three same-sex marriage cases then petitioning for a writ of certiorari in the U.S. Supreme Court–Bostic, Bishop, and Kitchen–and for 91 days thereafter. When the district court's preliminary injunction took effect on January 6, 2015, enforcement of Florida's bans on same-sex marriage ended.

Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U.S. ___ (2015), is a landmark civil rights case in which the Supreme Court of the United States ruled 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. The 5–4 ruling requires all fifty states, the District of Columbia, and the Insular Areas to perform and recognize the marriages of same-sex couples on the same terms and conditions as the marriages of opposite-sex couples, with all the accompanying rights and responsibilities.

<i>Washington v. Trump</i> Lawsuit challenging Executive Order 13769

State of Washington and State of Minnesota v. Trump, 847 F.3d 1151, was a lawsuit that challenged the lawfulness and constitutionality of Executive Order 13769, an executive order signed by U.S. President Donald Trump.

References

  1. 1 2 "Measure No. 58". Official 1998 General Election Online Voters' Guide. Oregon Secretary of State. October 12, 1998. Retrieved 2008-12-03.
  2. ↑ Oregon Judicial Department - Publications
  3. ↑ Wentz, Patty (August 26, 1998). "Birth of a Notion". Willamette Week.
  4. ↑ Willamette Week- News Buzz
  5. ↑ Willamette Week News Lead Story
  6. ↑ Willamette Week| 98 Ballot Measures| Civil Rights
  7. ↑ Itemized Measure Listings, 1998 General Election: State Measure 58 page 15
  8. ↑ OREGON v. HELEN HILL, CURTIS ENDICOTT, SUSAN UPDYKE; and THE OREGON ADOPTIVE RIGHTS ASSOCIATION, Oregon Supreme Court, filed 1999-12-29.
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.