News
2006-08-12
Arizona judge
rejects challenge to antigay amendment proposal
A judge on
Thursday rejected a legal challenge to an initiative that
would ban same-sex marriage and ruled that the propose
A judge on
Thursday rejected a legal challenge to an initiative that
would ban same-sex marriage and ruled that the proposed
state constitutional measure can go on Arizona's
November 7 general election ballot. Judge Douglas
Rayes of Maricopa County superior court rejected
opponents' argument that the Protect Marriage Arizona
initiative, which would appear on the ballot as
Proposition 107, violated a constitutional requirement
that each constitutional amendment be a separate ballot
measure.
The opposition
Arizona Together campaign said it will appeal Rayes's
ruling to the Arizona supreme court. The measure would
define marriage as a union between one man and one
woman and prohibit state and local governments from
providing marriage-like legal status to other
relationships.
Supporters
acknowledged that a second provision would eliminate
domestic-partner benefits provided by some Arizona local
governments, and opponents of that provision say it
should be a separate constitutional amendment because
some voters would favor one part of the amendment but
not the other.
However, Rayes
said the measure satisfies the single-amendment
requirement. Both provisions "have but one purpose, the
protection of marriage by preventing redefinition and
extension of official status to marriage substitutes,"
he wrote.
Glen Lavy, an
attorney for initiative supporters, pledged to oppose the
opponents' planned appeal and called their challenge "just
another desperate attempt to evade the democratic
process by those who advocate redefining marriage."
State
representative Kirsten Sinema, a Phoenix Democrat who heads
the Arizona Together campaign, said Rayes's ultimate
conclusion was wrong but that it was significant that
he noted supporters' acknowledged the ban on partner
benefits. The initiative "is not about protection against
same-sex marriage. It is about banning domestic-partner
benefits," Sinema said. (AP)
Click here to follow The Advocate on Twitter.
Page 1 of 1