The California State Amendment to Protect Marriage

So, I recently took my required general education political science courses this summer and learned some interesting things. For one,  I do not understand bureaucracy. But I do not think that this is an unusual thing nor do I think that it is unique to me.  Quite frankly, I believe that not even the bureaucrats understand bureaucracy and they created it. What I found that I do understand well is our federal judicial system and how it is implemented, especially in regards to the US Supreme Court.

Through the course of reading my textbook, I discovered the power of the class action lawsuit against the state and, by default, the federal government. During the Civil Rights movement there was this seemingly tiny lawsuit that set precedents for all others to come. A woman stood up on behalf of herself, her children, and her community and sued her state's Board of Education. The case was eventually heard before the US Supreme Court in Washington, D.C. Most of us know it as Brown v. Board of Education. Mrs. Brown sued the State of Kansas to eliminate segregation in the public school system. And it worked. Not just on a local level, but on a national level. Eventually the US Supreme Court decided that ALL segregation based on race or color was unconstitutional and ordered that ALL public schools be desegregated.

Some of you are probably wondering what this has to do with the title of this entry. Well, earlier this summer the Supreme Court of the State of California overturned Proposition 22 and declared that it went against the state's constitution. This means that until an amendment to the California Constitution is passed, establishing once again by the voice of the people that marriage is defined as a union between one man and one woman only, homosexual marriage is legal and recognized in the State of California. The very wording of the California Supreme Court ruling is so broad that several State's Attorneys General and US Senators signed a petition requesting that the California Supreme Court re-write it.

As the ruling now stands, ANY homosexual couple can be married in the State of California regardless of residency. (In fact, you could probably marry your dog and get away with it.) This means that a homosexual couple from Arizona could drive to Indio, CA, be married and drive back to Arizona. But because Arizona does not recognize same-sex marriages, their union would not be legally binding in Arizona. (sidenote: The State of Massachussettes has legalized homosexual marriage but only for those who are legal residents of the state and who remain as residents of the state.)

So how does all of this effect those of us who do not live in California? Well, theoretically, if the Amendment to Protect Marriage fails to pass and homosexual marriage remains legal in the State of California, the wording of the California Supreme Court ruling allows anyone to come to California and be married. As it now stands all legal marriages in any state of the United States are recognized in any other state of the US. Therefore, if there are no stipulations in a law that state "must be a resident of," as in the Massachussettes law, then according to Federal law that state law allowing homosexual marriage in one state should be recognized in all other states as legal and binding.

This means that the aforementioned homosexual couple from Arizona could get a lot of other homosexual couples, who have been married in California but reside in Arizona, to join with them to file a class action lawsuit against the State of Arizona to recognize homosexual marriages as legal and binding in the State of Arizona. Should that happen, eventually the suit would go before the US Supreme Court. If they rule that one state must recognize homosexual marriages performed in another state as legally binding, one can conclude that they would declare that all states in The United States of America recognize homosexual marriage as a legal and binding form of marriage throughout the country and territories.

The outcome of this vote in California could potentially force Federal legislation allowing homosexual marriage in your state, regardless of what the majority of the people say or whether this issue has already been voted on. I say potentially because when California Proposition 22 was voted on 61% of those who voted went to the polls and declared that the definition of marriage is a union between one man and one woman.

There is every possibility that the amendment will pass and homosexual marriage will once again no longer be a legally recognized union. But should that 3-5% of the California population who are homosexual and their liberal friends be the only ones going to the polls on this issue in November, the amendment will fail. And then we will have to see if anyone else observed the same impact the US Judicial system has on our legislation or not. At that point it will no longer be an issue of whether your state already voted to protect marriage between a man and a woman or not. The US Supreme Court made some interesting decision this past session. It might be a good idea to stay informed. 

For more information on this issue, go to www.protectmarriage.com