California still has an anti-gay marriage law on the books. Voters uld remove next year - CBS Sacramento

Contents:

• CALIFORNIA VOTERS WILL BE ASKED TO REAFFIRM GAY MARRIAGE PROTECTNS ON 2024 BALLOT
• CALIFORNIA STILL HAS AN ANTI-GAY MARRIAGE LAW ON THE BOOKS. VOTERS ULD REMOVE NEXT YEAR
• LAWMAKERS WANT CA VOTERS TO OFFICIALLY STRIKE DOWN PROP. 8, THE BAN ON GAY MARRIAGE MEASURE
• PROP 8 LG EXPLAED: WHY GAY MARRIAGE WILL RUME CALIFORNIA

CALIFORNIA VOTERS WILL BE ASKED TO REAFFIRM GAY MARRIAGE PROTECTNS ON 2024 BALLOT

Californians will vote on a proposal to amend the state Constutn on the 2024 ballot to reaffirm gay marriage rights — a ut move that amid natnal anxiety after recent lgs by the nservative-leang U. Although there is no current threat to the legaly of gay marriage, and Print Bin signed a bill safeguardg last year, the Democratic-domant state Legislature is seekg to remove language om California’s Constutn that still f marriage as between a man and outdated state fn has been emed unenforceable and unnstutnal thanks to feral law, but LGBTQ advocy groups are askg voters to repeal and amend the California Constutn to stead explicly state that marriage is “a fundamental right. Gav Newsom was out of state, Senate lear Toni Atks (D-San Diego) signed bills to law on his behalf as the first out gay actg ernor.

Wh over 13 ln vot st, California voters approve Proposn 8 on November 4, 2008, amendg the state’s nstutn to ban same-sex months earlier, May 2008, the California Supreme Court had emed the state’s ban on same-sex marriage unnstutnal, makg California the send state the untry to legalize gay marriage. Californian voters received robolls om former print Bill Clton askg them to vote no on the measure, while actors om the televisn show “Ugly Betty” argued Spanish-language TV spots that votg no “is not about beg gay or straight, ” but “about beg Amerin.

”The Protect Marriage mpaign supportg Proposn 8 nstantly voked the “far-reachg nsequenc” of legal gay marriage, particularly the implitn that school curriculums would be required to teach that gay marriage is “the same as tradnal marriage. ” Pollster David Fleischer, his analysis of the electn rults, found that the greatt shift toward “Y” among uncid voters was “among parents wh children unr 18 livg at home—many of them whe Democrats, ” who feared the effects of legal gay marriage on their children’s public tn.

CALIFORNIA STILL HAS AN ANTI-GAY MARRIAGE LAW ON THE BOOKS. VOTERS ULD REMOVE NEXT YEAR

READ MORE: The Supreme Court Rulgs That Have Shaped Gay Rights AmeriAlso on This Day History November | 4. The measure put gay and lbian marriag on hold the state, but a feral appeals urt 2010 emed Proposn 8 se ma s way to the US Supreme Court, which dismissed an appeal 2013 over same-sex marriage on jurisdictnal grounds, lg private parti did not have standg to fend California’s voter-approved ballot measure barrg gay and lbian upl om state-sanctned lg cleared the way for same-sex marriag the state to rume and Proposn 8 has remaed on the books but unenforced. California still has an anti-gay marriage law on the books.

Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed a subsequent legislative attempt to legalize gay marriage. Supreme Court legalized gay marriage natnally two years later. The Supreme Court lg on a California law known as Proposn 8 me down to a legal technily but has huge practil effect — rtorg gay marriage the natn’s most populo urt led that proponents of Proposn 8, a ban on gay marriage passed by California voters 2008, did not have the legal right to fend the law the feral Jtice John Roberts, wrg for the urt, said that the proponents — the people who put Proposn 8 on the ballot — had no “personal stake” fendg , at least no more than other ordary cizens of California.

LAWMAKERS WANT CA VOTERS TO OFFICIALLY STRIKE DOWN PROP. 8, THE BAN ON GAY MARRIAGE MEASURE

To have a se, the standard says, you have to show California Supreme Court led May 2008 that gay upl had a right to marry. Six months later, Proposn 8 passed wh 52 percent of the vote, haltg gay marriage gay upl then sued feral urt to overturn the ban. The Supreme Court said Wednday that they had no lg was important not jt for what did — clear the way for the rumptn of gay marriage California — but for what didn’t do.

The urt ma no lg on whether there is a nstutnal right to gay marriage.

PROP 8 LG EXPLAED: WHY GAY MARRIAGE WILL RUME CALIFORNIA

”The lg was much narrower than the other major Supreme Court cisn on Wednday, which held that gay upl who are legally married their stat are entled to feral benefs.