2008 Arizona Proposition 102

{{Short description|Successful referendum on an amendment banning same-sex marriage}}

{{Infobox referendum

| name =Arizona Proposition 102{{cite web|url=http://www.azsos.gov/election/2008/General/Canvass2008GE.pdf |title=State of Arizona Official Canvass: 2008 General Election – November 4, 2008 |date=2008-12-01 |access-date=2008-12-13 |publisher=Secretary of State of Arizona |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081219172036/http://www.azsos.gov/election/2008/General/Canvass2008GE.pdf |archive-date=19 December 2008 |url-status=dead }}

| title = Marriage Protection Amendment
Amends the Arizona Constitution to define marriage between one man and one woman.

| country = Arizona

|yes = 1,258,355

|no = 980,753

|total = 2,320,851

| electorate = 2,987,451

| turnoutpct = 74.95

| map = File:2008 Arizona Proposition 102 results map by county.svg

| mapdivision = county

| mapcaption =

Yes

| notes = Sources: [https://apps.azsos.gov/election/2008/General/Canvass2008GE.pdf 2008 General Election - November 4, 2008 Arizona]

|date=November 4, 2008}}

Arizona Proposition 102 was an amendment to the constitution of the U.S. state of Arizona adopted by a ballot measure held in 2008. It added Article 30 of the Arizona Constitution, which says: "Only a union of one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in this state."{{cite web|url=https://www.azleg.gov/viewDocument/?docName=http://www.azleg.gov/const/30/1.htm|title=Senate Concurrent Resolution 1042|date=2008-08-26}} The amendment added a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage to existing statutory bans in place since 1996.{{cite news|title=Same-Sex Marriage on the Ballot in Arizona, a Second Time|first=Jesse|last=McKinley|date=October 29, 2008|work=The New York Times|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/30/us/politics/30marriage.html?_r=0}}

In October 2014, Article 30 of the Arizona Constitution was struck down as unconstitutional in the United States District Court for the District of Arizona, and is no longer enforced by the state of Arizona, which subsequently allows and recognizes same-sex marriages.{{cite web|last1=Westfall|first1=Julie|title=Arizona and Wyoming gay marriage bans struck down|url=http://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-arizonas-gay-marriage-ban-struck-down-20141017-story.html|website=Los Angeles Times|date=17 October 2014 |access-date=2 December 2014}}

Despite the court ruling, Article 30 remains in the state's constitution, and on the Arizona State Legislature's website there is no indication that Article 30 of the constitution was struck down or otherwise rendered inoperative.{{cite web |title=Article XXX: Marriage |url=https://www.azleg.gov/viewDocument/?docName=http://www.azleg.gov/const/30/1.htm |website=Arizona State Legislature |access-date=August 23, 2021}}

Overview

On August 26, 2008, Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard and Secretary of State Jan Brewer agreed that the ballot description would state that same-sex marriage was already prohibited by statute.{{cite web|url=http://www.azstarnet.com/allheadlines/254755|title=Voters to be told gay vows already banned|date=2008-08-27|work=The Arizona Daily Star|access-date=2008-09-01| archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20080901021231/http://www.azstarnet.com/allheadlines/254755| archive-date= 1 September 2008 | url-status= live}} Incorporating the same provision into the Arizona Constitution was meant to prevent an Arizona court from ruling that the statute was invalid under the Arizona Constitution.

Along with similar measures in California (California Proposition 8 (2008)) and Florida (Florida Amendment 2 (2008)), Proposition 102 was decided by voters in the general election on November 4, 2008. The amendment passed by a margin of 56% in favor and 44% against.

Proposition 102 had no immediate impact because its definition of marriage was consistent with the existing statutory definition.{{cite web|url=http://www.azleg.gov/FormatDocument.asp?inDoc=/ars/25/00101.htm&Title=25&DocType=ARS|title=Arizona Revised Statutes 25–101|date=2008-08-26}} As an amendment to the Constitution of Arizona, the definition cannot be changed by the state legislature, and the possibility that a state court might find a state constitutional guarantee of same-sex couples' right to marry is eliminated.

Supporters and opponents

As of August 27, 2008 three committees related to Proposition 102 were registered with the Secretary of State:{{cite web|url=http://www.azsos.gov/cfs/CommitteeSearchResults.aspx |title=Political Committees, Arizona Ballot Measure |date=2008-08-26 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110518205750/http://www.azsos.gov/cfs/CommitteeSearchResults.aspx |archive-date=2011-05-18 }} YESforMarriage.com supporting Prop 102 was the one committee in support, and the two committees in opposition were No on Prop 102 and Arizona Together Opposed to Prop 102.

Supporters said that Proposition 102 was necessary to prevent judges changing the legal definition of marriage, as was done in Massachusetts, California, Connecticut and Iowa. Opponents said that Proposition 102 was unnecessary because same-sex marriage was already illegal in Arizona, and that there were more pressing issues facing Arizona; also they cited the issue of the separation of church and state.Walkup, Bob; Walkup, Beth. [http://www.votenoprop102.com/web/about102.php "Publicity Pamphlet Argument"] Vote NO on Proposition 102, October 22, 2008.

Miscellaneous

Proposition 102 was placed on the ballot via referendum rather than through the initiative process on the last day of the legislative session. Presiding State Senator Jack Harper defeated a filibuster on June 27, 2008 to place the proposed Constitutional Amendment on the ballot. Harper faced an ethics investigation over allegedly violating Senate rules by cutting off the microphones of two senators who were attempting to filibuster the bill.{{cite web|url=http://www.tucsoncitizen.com/daily/local/92134.php|title=State senator faces ethics probe in same-sex marriage debate|date=2008-07-29|work=Tucson Citizen|access-date=2008-09-01}} Despite the fact that Harper admitted to cutting off the microphones intentionally,{{cite web|url=http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/story/121807 |title=Ethics Committee to question Harper in microphone flap |date=2008-07-28 |work=East Valley Tribune |access-date=2008-09-17 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080921045131/http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/story/121807 |archive-date=21 September 2008 |url-status=dead }} a Senate ethics committee consisting of three Republicans and two Democrats voted 3–2, along strict party lines, to dismiss the charges.{{cite web |url=https://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2008/07/28/ethics-panel-votes-to-investigate-harper/ |title=Ethics panel votes to investigate Harper |date=July 28, 2008 |website=Arizona Capitol Times |access-date=March 8, 2021}}

State Senators Jack W. Harper, Ronald Gould, Thayer Verschoor, and John Huppenthal stood out as the proponents of the Marriage Amendment to the Arizona State Constitution. The language of Prop 102 was adopted as a strike-everything amendment to Senator Gould's SCR1042.

In 2006, a more restrictive measure, Proposition 107, had been defeated in the general election.

Results

{{Referendum

|title=Arizona Proposition 102{{cite web|url=http://www.azsos.gov/election/2008/General/Canvass2008GE.pdf |title=State of Arizona Official Canvass: 2008 General Election – November 4, 2008 |date=2008-12-01 |access-date=2008-12-13 |publisher=Secretary of State of Arizona |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081219172036/http://www.azsos.gov/election/2008/General/Canvass2008GE.pdf |archive-date=19 December 2008 |url-status=dead }}

|yes=1,258,355

|yes%=56.2

|no=980,753

|no%=43.8

|total=2,239,078

|turnout%=77.7

}}

=By county=

[[File:2008AZprop102.png|thumb|right|Election results by county.{{legend|Lime|Yes|border=1px#AAAAAA solid}}

{{legend|Red|No|border=1px #AAAAAA solid}}]]

class="wikitable sortable"
County{{cite web\|url=http://www.azsos.gov/results/2008/general/BM102.htm \|title=Arizona Secretary of State: 2008 general election – Ballot measures \|access-date=2010-04-20 \|url-status=dead \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111101120208/http://www.azsos.gov/results/2008/general/BM102.htm \|archive-date=2011-11-01 }} ! Yes (%)	Yes (#) ! No (%)	No (#)
{{yes}} \| Apache \| 76%	18,044 \| 23%	5,405
{{yes}} \| Cochise \| 63%	30,492 \| 37%	17,582
{{yes}} \| Coconino \| 50%	26,845 \| 49%	26,264
{{yes}} \| Gila \| 68%	14,443 \| 32%	6,884
{{yes}} \| Graham \| 80%	9,406 \| 20%	2,352
{{yes}} \| Greenlee \| 73%	2,024 \| 27%	744
{{yes}} \| La Paz \| 66%	3,524 \| 34%	1,785
{{yes}} \| Maricopa \| 55%	741,797 \| 45%	595,077
{{yes}} \| Mohave \| 66%	43,258 \| 34%	21,861
{{yes}} \| Navajo \| 75%	25,317 \| 25%	8,460
{{no}} \| Pima \| 49%	188,942 \| 51%	195,148
{{yes}} \| Pinal \| 61%	62,425 \| 39%	39,457
{{yes}} \| Santa Cruz \| 52%	6,412 \| 48%	5,902
{{yes}} \| Yavapai \| 61%	59,497 \| 39%	38,546
{{yes}} \| Yuma \| 63%	25,929 \| 37%	15,286
{{yes}} \| Total \| 56.2%	1,258,355 \| 44%	980,753

class="wikitable sortable"

County{{cite web|url=http://www.azsos.gov/results/2008/general/BM102.htm |title=Arizona Secretary of State: 2008 general election – Ballot measures |access-date=2010-04-20 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111101120208/http://www.azsos.gov/results/2008/general/BM102.htm |archive-date=2011-11-01 }}

! Yes (%)

Yes (#)

! No (%)

No (#)

| Apache

| 76%

18,044

| 23%

5,405

| Cochise

| 63%

30,492

| 37%

17,582

| Coconino

| 50%

26,845

| 49%

26,264

| Gila

| 68%

14,443

| 32%

6,884

| Graham

| 80%

9,406

| 20%

2,352

| Greenlee

| 73%

2,024

| 27%

744

| La Paz

| 66%

3,524

| 34%

1,785

| Maricopa

| 55%

741,797

| 45%

595,077

| Mohave

| 66%

43,258

| 34%

21,861

| Navajo

| 75%

25,317

| 25%

8,460

| Pima

| 49%

188,942

| 51%

195,148

| Pinal

| 61%

62,425

| 39%

39,457

| Santa Cruz

| 52%

6,412

| 48%

5,902

| Yavapai

| 61%

59,497

| 39%

38,546

| Yuma

| 63%

25,929

| 37%

15,286

| Total

| 56.2%

1,258,355

| 44%

980,753

Full text

{{blockquote|Be it resolved by the Senate of the State of Arizona, the House of Representatives concurring:

1. Article XXX, Constitution of Arizona, is proposed to be added as follows if approved by the voters and on proclamation of the Governor:

ARTICLE XXX. MARRIAGE

SECTION 1. ONLY A UNION OF ONE MAN AND ONE WOMAN SHALL BE VALID OR RECOGNIZED AS A MARRIAGE IN THIS STATE.

2. The Secretary of State shall submit this proposition to the voters at the next general election as provided by article XXI, Constitution of Arizona.}}

Effects

The amendment, which took effect on December 1, 2008, constitutionally banned same-sex marriages, which were never recognized by the state and was statutorily banned since 1975. Arizona became the 29th US state to ban same-sex marriage in its constitution. This preempted the state judiciary from requiring the state to legally recognize same-sex marriages and preempted the Arizona State Legislature from enacting a statute legalizing same-sex marriages.

Pre-decision opinion polls

class="wikitable"
Date of opinion poll !Conducted by !Sample size !In favor !Against !Undecided !Margin !Margin of Error !Source
style="background:#f0f0f0;" \| September 25 – 28, 2008	KAET-TV and Arizona State University	976 registered voters	{{Yes\|49%\|align=left}}	42%	9%	7% pro	±3%	[https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna27454163 Ariz. anti-gay marriage groups seek redemption]
style="background:#f0f0f0;" \| Prior to May 15, 2008	?	?	{{Yes\|49%\|align=left}}	40%	11%	9% pro	?	[https://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2008/october/20.31.html Life, Death, and Chicken Cages]

class="wikitable"

Date of opinion poll

!Conducted by

!Sample size

!In favor

!Against

!Undecided

!Margin

!Margin of Error

!Source

style="background:#f0f0f0;" | September 25 – 28, 2008

KAET-TV and Arizona State University

976 registered voters

42%

7% pro

±3%

[https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna27454163 Ariz. anti-gay marriage groups seek redemption]

style="background:#f0f0f0;" | Prior to May 15, 2008

40%

11%

9% pro

[https://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2008/october/20.31.html Life, Death, and Chicken Cages]

References

External links

[http://yesformarriage.com/ YESforMarriage.com] (Yes on Prop 102)
[http://www.aztogether.org Arizona Together] (No on Prop 102)
[http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Arizona_Marriage_Protection_Amendment_(2008) Arizona Proposition 102 (2008) – Ballotpedia]
[https://www.followthemoney.org/research/institute-reports/the-money-behind-the-2008-same-sex-partnership-ballot-measures The Money Behind the 2008 Same-Sex Partnership Ballot Measures – The National Institute On Money In State Politics]

Category:2008 Arizona elections

Category:2008 ballot measures in the United States

Category:Arizona ballot measures

Category:LGBTQ in Arizona

Category:U.S. state constitutional amendments banning same-sex unions

Category:2008 in LGBTQ history

Category:Same-sex marriage ballot measures in the United States