Michigan Marriage Amendment, Proposal 2 (2004)

Voting on Marriage and Family Ballot Measures By state By year Not on ballot Michigan Constitution Preamble Articles I • II • III • IV • V • VI • VII • VIII • IX • X • XI • XII • Schedule

The Michigan Marriage Initiative, also known as Proposal 2, was on the November 2004 ballot in Michigan as an initiated constitutional amendment, where it was approved and later overturned. The had stated that the union of one man and one woman in marriage would be the only agreement recognized as a marriage or similar union for any purpose.

Aftermath

Federal District Court

On March 21, 2014, a federal district court judge Bernard Friedman ruled that the measure violated the U.S. Constitution, and ordered that the state stop enforcing the ban. Friedman stated that, "The court finds the (amendment) impermissibly discriminates against same-sex couples in violation of the Equal Protection Clause because the provision does not advance any conceivable state interest." The ruling followed similar rulings in Texas, Virginia, Oklahoma and Utah. However, the rulings in those cases only suspended the enforcement of similar laws until appeals could be made to higher courts.

Sixth Circuit Court

On November 6, 2014, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the district court's ruling in Michigan. In a 2 to 1 vote, Judge Jeffrey Sutton and Judge Deborah Cook upheld the voter-approved ban. Judge Sutton said:

“	When the courts do not let the people resolve new social issues like this one, they perpetuate the idea that the heroes in these change events are judges and lawyers. Better in this instance, we think, to allow change through the customary political processes, in which the people, gay and straight alike, become the heroes of their own stories by meeting each other not as adversaries in a court system but as fellow citizens seeking to resolve a new social issue in a fair-minded way.	”
—Judge Jeffrey Sutton

He also argued that states have an interest in defining measure "not to regulate love but to regulate sex, most especially the intended and unintended effects of male-female intercourse." Judge Martha Craig Daughtrey, the court's dissenter, delivered a critical opinion. She said, "If we in the judiciary do not have the authority, and indeed the responsibility, to right fundamental wrongs left excused by a majority of the electorate, our whole intricate, constitutional system of checks and balances, as well as the oaths to which we swore, prove to be nothing but shams."

Appeals to the US Supreme Court were filed for the Michigan case and for cases from other states in the Sixth Circuit's jurisdiction. The Michigan petition asked the nation's highest court to decide "[w]hether a state violates the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution by denying same-sex couples the right to marry." The US Supreme Court refused to hear appeals from states seeking to uphold same-sex marriage bans in October 2014, which was before the Sixth Circuit's ruling. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg hinted at the court's reasoning, saying, "Now if that court should disagree with the others, then there will be some urgency in the court taking the case." With the Sixth Circuit's ruling, there is now a disagreement between appeals courts.

U.S. Supreme Court

See also: Obergefell v. Hodges

On June 26, 2015, the United States Supreme Court ruled that same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marriage under the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution in the case Obergefell v. Hodges. This ruling overturned all voter-approved constitutional bans on same-sex marriage.

Justice Anthony Kennedy authored the opinion and Justices Ruth Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan joined. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito each authored a dissent.

The concluding paragraph of the court's majority opinion read:

“	No union is more profound than marriage, for it embodies the highest ideals of love, fidelity, devotion, sacrifice, and family. In forming a marital union, two people become something greater than once they were. As some of the petitioners in these cases demonstrate, marriage embodies a love that may endure even past death. It would misunderstand these men and women to say they disrespect the idea of marriage. Their plea is that they do respect it, respect it so deeply that they seek to find its fulfillment for themselves. Their hope is not to be condemned to live in loneliness, excluded from one of civilization’s oldest institutions. They ask for equal dignity in the eyes of the law. The Constitution grants them that right.	”
—Opinion of the Court in Obergefell v. Hodges

Election results

Michigan Proposal 2 (2004)
Result		Votes	Percentage
a Yes		2,698,077	58.62%
No		1,904,319	41.38%

Official results via: The Michigan Secretary of the State

Financing the campaign

The "yes" campaign spent $1,931,409 and the "no" campaign spent $854,212.

Major donors to the "yes" side were:

• Archdiocese of Detroit, $538,100.
• Jointly, the Dioceses of Lansing, Grand Rapids, Saginaw, Gaylord, Kalamazoo and Marquette, $461,900.
• Family Research Council, $376,397.

Major donors to the "no" side were:

• Human Rights Campaign, $231,081.
• Jon Stryker, $20,000.

Related measures

Many historical marriage and family-related ballot measures regard the definition of legal marriage. The debate often revolved around whether marriage should be legally defined as the “union of one male and one female” or the “union of two persons [regardless of sex].” Voters chose to define marriage as between “one male and one female” in the following 30 states. The first constitutional prohibition was in 1998, and the latest one occurred in May 2012. All bans on same-sex marriage were overturned in the 2015 United States Supreme Court case Obergefell v. Hodges.

• 1998: Alaska
• 2000: Nebraska
• 2002: Nevada
• 2004: Arkansas
• 2004: Georgia
• 2004: Kentucky
• 2004: Louisiana
• 2004: Michigan
• 2004: Mississippi
• 2004: Missouri
• 2004: Montana
• 2004: North Dakota
• 2004: Ohio
• 2004: Oklahoma
• 2004: Oregon
• 2004: Utah
• 2005: Kansas
• 2005: Texas
• 2006: Alabama
• 2006: Colorado
• 2006: Idaho
• 2006: South Carolina
• 2006: South Dakota
• 2006: Tennessee
• 2006: Virginia
• 2006: Wisconsin
• 2008: Arizona
• 2008: California
• 2008: Florida
• 2012: North Carolina

See also

Suggest a link

• Michigan 2004 ballot measures
• 2004 ballot measures
• List of Michigan ballot measures
• History of Initiative & Referendum in Michigan

External links

• 2004 Election Results via The Michigan Secretary of the State