Illinois officials reject antigay ballot measure

The Illinois board of elections agreed on Friday with a hearing officer that an advisory referendum on same-sex marriage doesn't have enough signatures to be on the November ballot. But opponents of marriage equality have taken their fight to federal court, contending that the process to get a referendum on the Illinois ballot is burdensome and unconstitutional. "Unless they pull a rabbit out of a hat in federal court, it's not going to be on the ballot," said Patricia Logue, senior counsel for Lambda Legal.

The nonbinding referendum would not ban same-sex marriage. Antigay groups want it on the ballot so that they can ask voters whether the state should amend its constitution to ban same-sex marriage. At the state fair in Springfield, Gov. Rod Blagojevich said he was pleased that it looks as if the referendum won't be on the ballot because he is opposed to changing the state's constitution.

Supporters of the referendum submitted more than 330,000 signatures, but a sample verification fell short of the state's requirement. The requirement is that more than 95% of a sample's signatures be valid; only 91% were.

Although the referendum's supporters lost their case at the federal district court level, they are hopeful the appellate court will intervene, said Peter LaBarbera, executive director of the antigay Illinois Family Institute. "It's not near over," LaBarbera said.

A 1996 Illinois law already prohibits same-sex marriage, but opponents fear that courts could overturn the law unless the state constitution is changed. More than 40 states have taken steps to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman either through constitutional amendments or with statutes.

A June poll showed that a majority of Illinois voters said they oppose same-sex marriage but that only 40% support asking state lawmakers for a constitutional amendment to ban it, according to the Chicago-based Glengariff Group. Fifty percent were opposed, and 10% were undecided.

Both Blagojevich and his Republican challenger, state treasurer Judy Baar Topinka, have said the 1996 state law makes a constitutional amendment unnecessary. Amending the state constitution is a lengthy process. The most common approach would be for both chambers of the legislature to vote by three-fifths majority to put an amendment on the ballot, where it would have to be approved by three fifths of voters. (AP)