Source: Oregonian, Court decision, Statesman Journal
Oregon's second-highest court today upheld a 2004 ballot measure that limits marriage to heterosexual couples.
The Oregon Court of Appeals ruled a week after the California Supreme Court struck down that state's ban on same-sex marriage as unconstitutionally discriminatory.
Like California, Oregon has a domestic partnership law that grants virtually all the rights of marriage to registered partners, but does not use the term "marriage." Today's narrow decision does not affect that law.
The marriage equality advocates that challenged Oregon's constitutional marriage ban can appeal today's ruling to the Oregon Supreme Court.
The ballot measure upheld today was sponsored by the Oregon Family Council after Multnomah County (Portland) began issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples in March 2004.
About 3,000 licenses were issued, but the Oregon Supreme Court decided in
2005 that the county had no authority under state law to do so. The justices did not decide directly whether state law discriminated against the rights of same-sex couples, saying that voter approval of Measure 36 had decided the marriage issue.
The appeals court rejected a legal challenge by some of the couples, who argued that the initiative violated a state constitutional ban on multiple amendments in a single measure unless the changes are "closely related." Today's decision upheld an earlier ruling by Judge Joseph Guimond in Marion County Circuit Court.
Advocates of marriage equality also argued that the 2004 initiative was unconstitutional because it revised the state's constitution in a way that is not allowed by one of the existing articles of the document.
They argued that the change made to Oregon's constitution by the voter-initiated ballot measure constituted a more significant alteration than is allowed under the initiative process for an "amendment." They argued that the measure's limitation of rights constitutes a "revision" to the constitution -- something that can be done only through a referendum introduced to the ballot by a vote of the legislature.
Guimond had rejected that argument without trial in what is called a "summary judgement" -- a decision by the judge based on written legal arguments by the parties.
Today's appellate court decision also upholds that judgement.
In making the ruling, the court rejected an argument similar to one California's high court had accepted: that the state's primary guarantees of equality required equal recognition of partnership rights for same-sex couples.
"As noted by the Supreme Court (in the 2005 decision), the passage of Measure 36 extinguished any rights that same-sex couples may have had to marriage" under the constitution's anti-discrimination provision, Judge Rick Haselton wrote for the appeals court.
The amendment upheld in today's ruling states:
"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."
About 20 states have written a ban on same-sex marriages into their constitutions.
The 2004 measure did not bar other legal recognition of same-sex couples.
Full article: Gay marriage ban upheld | Oregonian
Appeals Court ruling
Appeals court upholds Oregon's ban on gay marriage | Statesman Journal