 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||
Amends Constitution: Only Marriage Between One Man and One Woman Is Valid or Legally Recognized as Marriage | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Results | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Sources:[1][2] | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Ballot Measure 36 was a 2004initiative in theU.S. state ofOregon. It amended theOregon Constitution to definemarriage as a union of one man and one woman. The initiative passed with 1,028,546 votes in favor, and 787,556 votes against (57% to 43%) in the November 2, 2004general election.[3]It is one of a number ofU.S. state constitutional amendments banning same-sex marriage. However, unlike other similar ballot measures passed on or near the same election date, the amendment did not explicitly ban civil unions between same-sex couples.
On May 19, 2014, the measure was declared unconstitutional by aU.S. federal district court judge, who ruled that it violated theEqual Protection Clause of theFourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.[4]
| Choice | Votes | % |
|---|---|---|
 Yes | 1,028,546 | 56.63 |
| No | 787,556 | 43.37 |
| Total votes | 1,816,102 | 100.00 |
| Registered voters/turnout | 2,550,887 | 71.19 |
Measure 36 added the following text toArticle 15 of the Oregon Constitution, as Section 5a:[6]
Policy regarding marriage.It is the policy of Oregon, and its political subdivisions, that only a marriage between one man and one woman shall be valid or legally recognized as a marriage. [Created through initiative petition filed March 2, 2004, and adopted by the people Nov. 2, 2004]
The measure was placed on the ballot through aninitiative petition brought by theOregon Defense of Marriage Coalition, a group dedicated to "preserving marriage as a union only between one man and one woman." The group was formed in reaction to same-sex marriages performed inMultnomah County andBenton County after their respectivecounty commissions interpreted the Oregon Constitution and Oregon law as authorizing the issuing of marriage licenses to same-sex couples. Supporters of the measure, in addition to opposing same-sex marriage on principle, were also angry by the controversial means by which theMultnomah County Commission had come to its decision: no public hearings were held before the commission voted to allow the marriages and one of the commissioners, Lonnie Roberts, was not informed of the move until after the other commissioners began issuing licenses. Roberts criticized the "clandestine way" that the decision was made and speculated that he had not been included in the discussion because the other commissioners knew that he wouldn't support their decision.[7][8] Supporters also wanted to prevent the state courts from coming to the same conclusion as the county commissions—that the state constitution and law required the government to license same-sex marriage—before several standingcivil rights lawsuits on the issue could be resolved.
Basic Rights Oregon led the campaign against Measure 36. Opponents of the measure made several arguments. Many were supporters of same-sex marriage. In addition, some argued that regardless of voters' feelings on same-sex marriage, the state constitution was an inappropriate place to dictate marriage policy, which should have beenstatutory. Opponents also argued that the measure addeddiscriminatory language to the state constitution, which, they predicted, would later be seen in the same negative light as earlier constitutional language againstAfrican Americans. They also feared that the measure could be used as a legal basis for denying benefits to same-sex couples which are automatically granted to heterosexual married couples.
According to Daniel June inJD Journal, JudgeHarry Pregerson effectively undermined the ban by declaring it unconstitutional, when he ruled in favor of Allison Clark that she should receive the same work benefits with her homosexual partner as heterosexual couples would receive.[9]
On May 19, 2014,United States District Judge Michael McShaneruled that Oregon's constitutional ban on same-sex marriage was unconstitutional. Since then, same-sex marriage has been legally recognized in Oregon.
Marvin Dennis Moore, aPortland churchorganist, wrotesatirical arguments on several Oregon ballot measures, including Measure 36. Moore's arguments, ostensibly in favor of the measure, were printed in the officialvoters' pamphlet. For example, reacting to some supporters' claims that the purpose of marriage is forprocreation, he argues that "couples who fail to conceive within two years ought to have their marriage licenses revoked." Measure 36 supporters criticized the placement of Moore's arguments in the "Arguments in Favor" section of the pamphlet, but theOregon Secretary of State's Office countered they had no choice under the law but to print his arguments as specified.[10]
