Assessing the Impact of State Constitutional Amendments Banning Gay Marriage

Dan82 · Aug 30, 2010

http://volokh.com/2010/08/30/predic...+Volokh+Conspiracy)&utm_content=Google+Reader

In this post commenting on the revelation that former Republican National Committee chairman Ken Mehlman is gay, Yale lawprof Jack Balkin argues that the recent spate of state anti-gay marriage constitutional amendments may significantly retard progress towards gay equality:

[Ken] Mehlman was the chair of the Bush 2004 presidential campaign, which deliberately used opposition to same-sex marriage–and indeed, moral opposition to homosexuality–as a way of increasing turnout among members of the Republican base. One way of doing this was to work with anti-SSM groups to schedule votes on state constitutional amendments that would prohibit the recognition of same sex marriage. As a result of this strategy, thirteen states passed such amendments during the 2004 election cycle, followed by a dozen or so more in the next four years.

These amendments matter because they complicate the most obvious path toward marriage equality: proceed state by state and get a majority (or more) of states to recognize same-sex marriage. After that occurs, it is much easier for the federal courts and the Supreme Court to consider a challenge to laws banning same sex marriage.

A few states with such constitutional amendments would not be a very serious obstacle......

The problem is that as a result of the 2004 Bush campaign, a much greater number of states have constitutional amendments that block both ordinary legislation and judicial interpretation of state constitutions. At last count, 29 states had constitutional bans on same sex marriage.

I criticized arguments similar to Balkin’s here, here, and here. To briefly summarize my main points, I doubt that these amendments will have more than a minor effect for two reasons. First, most of them are in states that are unlikely to enact gay marriage anytime soon. Even more importantly, most are in states with easy to amend constitutions. The vast majority of the amendments in question were enacted by a majority vote referendum, similar to that which led to the passage of California’s Proposition 8. When and if public opinion in those states shifts decisively in favor of gay marriage, advocates can easily reverse those amendments by sponsoring a referendum initiative of their own. To be sure, such an effort requires funding and organization. But gay marriage advocates are reasonably strong in both areas. For these reasons, the anti-gay marriage amendments will ultimately cause no more than brief delays in the enactment of gay marriage once majority opinion comes to support it...

http://volokh.com/2010/08/30/predic...+Volokh+Conspiracy)&utm_content=Google+Reader
Click to expand...

AlexPatrickMorrissey · Aug 30, 2010

I think it only buys time for the idiots who are against marriage equality.

Oh yeah, and bigotry is NOT constitutional.

Assessing the Impact of State Constitutional Amendments Banning Gay Marriage

Dan82
Full Member

AlexPatrickMorrissey Guest

Assessing the Impact of State Constitutional Amendments Banning Gay Marriage

Thread Tools

Dan82 Full Member

AlexPatrickMorrissey Guest

Dan82
Full Member