State-by-State Ballot Initiatives on Same-Sex Marriage

Updated October 21, 2004

Arkansas

This citizen-initiated measure to amend the constitution needed 80,570 signatures by July 2 to be placed on the 2004 ballot. Approximately 200,693 signatures were turned in on July 1, 2004. The Secretary of State certified the signatures July 23.

The measure would amend the state constitution to read:

"Marriage consists only of the union of one man and one woman. Legal status for unmarried persons which is identical or substantially similar to marital status shall not be valid or recognized in Arkansas, except that the legislature may recognize a common law marriage from another state between a man and a woman. The legislature has the power to determine the capacity of persons to marry, subject to this amendment, and the legal rights, obligations, privileges, and immunities of marriage."

This measure will be on the Nov. 2, 2004 ballot.

Georgia

Kentucky

Senate Bill 245 passed the state senate on March 11 by a 33-4 vote and the state house on April 12 by an 85-11 vote.

The measure would amend the state constitution to read:

"Only a marriage between one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in Kentucky. A legal status identical or substantially similar to that of marriage for unmarried individuals shall not be valid or recognized."

This measure will be on the Nov. 2 ballot.

Louisiana

House Bill 61 passed the state house May 18 by an 87-11 vote and the state senate by a vote of 31-6 on June 9.

The measure would amend the state constitution to read:

"Marriage in the state of Louisiana shall consist only of the union of one man and one woman. No official or court of the state of Louisiana shall construe this constitution or any state law to require that marriage or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon any member of a union other than the union of one man and one woman. A legal status identical or substantially similar to that of marriage for unmarried individuals shall not be valid or recognized. No official or court of the state of Louisiana shall recognize any marriage contracted in any other jurisdiction which is not the union of one man and one woman."

There have been several legal challenges to this measure. The 4th Circuit Court of Appeal heard oral arguments Aug. 27 from challengers of the measure, as well as from the state. The appeal arose from an Aug. 20 ruling by New Orleans Civil District Judge Bruno that found the measure unconstitutional.

On Sept. 18, more than 600,000 voters turned out to approve the proposed amendment by a 4-to-1 margin. On Oct. 5, a state judge threw out the amendment on grounds that it was flawed for having more than one purpose: banning not only same-sex marriage, but civil unions as well.

An attorney for supporters of the amendment said he would appeal the Oct. 5 ruling.

Massachusetts

House Bill 3190 was passed by the state constitutional convention (joint session of the house and senate) on March 29 by a 105-92 vote. It must be voted on again by the state constitutional convention during the 2005/2006 session.

The measure would amend the state constitution to read:

"The unified purpose of this Article is both to define the institution of civil marriage and to establish civil unions to provide same-sex persons with entirely the same benefits, protections, rights, privileges and obligations as are afforded to married persons, while recognizing that under present federal law same-sex persons in civil unions will be denied federal benefits available to married persons. It being the public policy of this commonwealth to protect the unique relationship of marriage, only the union of one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in the commonwealth. Two persons of the same sex shall have the right to form a civil union if they otherwise meet the requirements set forth by law for marriage. Civil unions for same sex persons are established by this Article and shall provide entirely the same benefits, protections, rights, privileges and obligations that are afforded to persons married under the law of the commonwealth. All laws applicable to marriage shall also apply to civil unions. This Article is self-executing, but the general court may enact laws not inconsistent with anything herein contained to carry out the purpose of this Article."

For more information, contact MassEquality.org.

The soonest this measure could appear on the ballot is 2006.

Michigan

A citizen-initiated measure to amend the state constitution needed 317,000 signatures to be placed on the 2004 ballot. Approximately 474,000 were turned in July 5.

The measure would amend the state constitution to read:

"To secure and preserve the benefits of marriage for our society and for future generations of children, the union of one man and one woman in marriage shall be the only agreement recognized as a marriage or similar union for any purpose."

The Board of State Canvassers deadlocked in 2-2 decision Aug. 23, on whether to certify the signatures. The issue will proceed to the state Court of Appeals.

This measure is scheduled to be on the Nov. 2 ballot.

Mississippi

House Concurrent Resolution passed the state house on March 1 and the state senate on April 7.

The measure would amend the state constitution to read:

"Marriage may take place and may be valid under the laws of this state only between a man and a woman. A marriage in another state or foreign jurisdiction between persons of the same gender, regardless of when the marriage took place, may not be recognized in this state and is void and unenforceable under the laws of this state."

This measure will be on the Nov. 2 ballot.

Montana

This citizen-initiated measure to amend the constitution needed 41,020 signatures to be placed on the 2004 ballot. Approximately 70,000 were turned in on June 18.

The measure would amend the state constitution to read:

"Only a marriage between one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in this state."

This measure will be on the Nov. 2 ballot.

North Dakota

This citizen-initiated measure to amend the state constitution needed 25,588 signatures to be placed on the 2004 ballot. Proponents of the measure turned in more than 42,000 signatures, and the Secretary of State certified the signatures Sept. 1.

The measure would amend the state constitution to read:

"Marriage consists only of the legal union between a man and a woman. No other domestic union, however denominated, may be recognized as a marriage or given the same or substantially equivalent effect."

This measure will be on the Nov. 2 ballot.

Ohio

A citizen-initiated measure to amend the state constitution needed 322,899 signatures to be placed on the 2004 ballot. Proponents turned in 391,000 signatures, which the Secretary of State certified on Sept. 29.

The measure would amend the state constitution to read:

"Only a union between one man and one woman may be a marriage valid in or recognized by this state and its political subdivisions. This state and its political subdivisions shall not create or recognize a legal status for relationships of unmarried individuals that intends to approximate the design, qualities, significance or effect of marriage."

This measure will be on the Nov. 2 ballot as State Issue No. 1.

Oklahoma

House Bill 2259 passed the state senate on April 15 by a 38-7 vote and the state house on April 22 by a 92-4 vote.

The measure would amend the state constitution to read:

"A. Marriage in this state shall consist only of the union of one man and one woman. Neither this Constitution nor any other provision of law shall be construed to require that marital status or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon unmarried couples or groups.

B. A marriage between persons of the same gender performed in another state shall not be recognized as valid and binding in this state as of the date of the marriage.

C. Any person knowingly issuing a marriage license in violation of this section shall be guilty of a misdemeanor."

This measure will be on the Nov. 2 ballot.

Oregon

This citizen-initiated measure to amend the constitution needed 100,840 signatures to be placed on the 2004 ballot. Approximately 244,000 were turned in June 30.

The measure would amend the state constitution to read:

"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."

This measure will be on the Nov. 2 ballot.

Tennessee

House Joint Resolution passed the state house May 6 with an 85-5 vote and the state senate May 10 with a 28-1 vote. The measure must be re-approved by the legislature during the 2005/06 session.

The measure would amend the state constitution to read:

"The historical institution and legal contract solemnizing the relationship of one man and one woman shall be the only legally recognized marital contract in this state. Any policy or law or judicial interpretation, purporting to define marriage as anything other than the historical institution and legal contract between one man and one woman, is contrary to the public policy of this state and shall be void and unenforceable in Tennessee. If another state or foreign jurisdiction issues a license for persons to marry and if such marriage is prohibited in this state by the provisions of this section, then the marriage shall be void and unenforceable in this state."

The soonest this measure could appear on the ballot is 2005.

Utah

House Joint Resolution passed the State House Feb. 24 by a 56-16 vote and the state senate March 3 by a 20-7 vote.

The measure would amend the state constitution to read:

"(1) Marriage consists only of the legal union between a man and a woman. (2) No other domestic status or union, however denominated, between persons is valid or recognized or may be authorized, sanctioned, or given the same or substantially equivalent legal effect as a marriage."

This measure will be on the Nov. 2 ballot.

Wisconsin

Assembly Joint Resolution 66 passed the state assembly March 5 by a 68-27 vote and the state senate March 11 by a 20-13 vote. The measure needs to be re-approved by the state legislature during the 2005 session.

The measure would amend the state constitution to read:

"Only a marriage between one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in this state. A legal status identical or substantially similar to that of marriage for unmarried individuals shall not be valid or recognized in this state."

The soonest this measure could appear on the ballot is 2005.