|
For
Immediate Release:
Thursday, August 18, 2005
COURT RULES ANTI-GAY INITIATIVE MUST BE PORTRAYED TRUTHFULLY
(Sacramento)
A California court today handed the proponents of an
anti-gay initiative a stunning defeat with its ruling upholding
the language used by the California Attorney General
to officially describe the proposed initiative. Proponents
of the so-called "Voters' Right to Protect Marriage
Initiative" attempted to portray the measure as a
protection of marriage. Instead, Attorney General Bill
Lockyer issued language that makes it clear that one of
the main impacts of the proposed constitutional amendment
would be to eliminate the obligations and protections that
California law now provides to registered domestic partners.
Sacramento
Superior Court Judge Raymond M. Cadei said that Lockyer's
summary and title were fair and impartial and has asked
for clarifying language regarding certain domestic partnership
rights that would be eliminated. From the bench Judge Cadei
said, "The initiative seems to put a fairly
large bull's eye on domestic partnership rights in the family
code."
There will be another hearing in two weeks unless the parties
agree to the language clarification.
"Today's ruling was in favor of truth and honesty in
our election system and a blow to the proponents' attempts
to hide the ball from California's voters," says Jennifer
C. Pizer, senior counsel with Lambda Legal and the lead counsel
for a group of organizations and individuals that were granted
the right to intervene in the dispute. "Their intention
is to not only permanently ban marriage equality but this
amendment would also strip rights from registered domestic
partners. Voters are entitled to know that."
"We are pleased that the court ruled in favor of an
honest representation of the real danger posed by this amendment
and the radical damage it would wreak on thousands of California
families", said Courtney Joslin, Senior Staff Attorney
at the National Center for Lesbian Rights.
The groups that intervened were Equality for All, a statewide
coalition working to defeat anti-marriage equality measures
on the ballot; Equality California, the statewide lesbian,
gay, bisexual, transgender advocacy group; and two couples
who are registered domestic partners who would be negatively
affected if this proposal were to be adopted by the voters.
"Particularly because we have two small children, we
are very fearful about what would happen if one of us was
injured or died. Although we both are legal parents to our
children, our family depends on many domestic partner protections
that provide financial and legal security in case of family
crisis," said Johnny Symons. "This amendment would
strip away those rights and the protections that come with
them." Symons and his partner William Rogers are one
of the two couples who filed as intervenors in today's case.
"This measure would leave many families headed by same
sex couples without health insurance, the right to inherit
property without expensive legal documents prepared in advance,
the ability to make medical decisions for their family and
many other protections that other couples take for granted," says
Geoff Kors, executive director of Equality California, which
sponsored California's domestic partnership law. "The
proponents of this measure are out of step with the people
of California, who reject discrimination and will also reject
this initiative."
The case is Bowler v. Lockyer. Court documents can be found
at www.lambdalegal.org. In addition to Lambda Legal, the
intervenors are represented by Margaret Prinzing and Karen
Getman of Remcho Johansen and Purcell, election law experts
based in San Leandro, California; Shannon Minter and Courtney
Joslin of the National Center for Lesbian Rights; and Christine
Sun, Tamara Lange and Jordan Budd of the ACLU Foundations
of California.
|
