Montana Definition of Marriage, CI-96 (2004)

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

The Montana Definition of Marriage Amendment, also known as CI-96, was on the November 2, 2004 ballot in Montana as an initiated constitutional amendment, where it was approved. The measure provided that only a marriage between a man and a woman may be valid if performed in Montana, or recognized if performed in another state.

Aftermath

U.S. District Court

On November 19, 2014, Judge Brian Morris of the U.S. District Court for Montana struck down the state's ban on same-sex marriage. Morris did not place a stay on his decision, therefor legalizing same-sex marriage immediately. In his ruling, Morris argued:

“	These families, like all of us, want their children to adventure into the world without fear of violence; to achieve all that their talent and perseverance allows without fear of discrimination; and to love themselves so that they can love others. No family wants to deprive its precious children of the chance to marry the loves of their lives. Montana no longer can deprive Plaintiffs and other same-sex couples of the chance to marry their loves.	”
—Judge Brian Morris

Gov. Steve Bullock (D) issued a statement in support of the ruling. He said, "Today's decision ensures we are closer to fulfilling our promise of freedom, dignity, and equality for all Montanans. It is a day to celebrate our progress, while recognizing the qualities that bind us as Montanans: a desire to make a good life for ourselves and our families, while providing greater opportunities to the next generation." US Senators Jon Tester (D) and John Walsh (D) also applauded the court's decision.

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

Montana CI-96 (2004)
otOverturned Case:Rolando v. Fox 4:2014cv00040
Result		Votes	Percentage
Yes		295,070	66.56%
No		148,263	33.44%

Election results via: Montana Secretary of State

Text of measure

The text of the measure can be read here.

Support

The initiative was introduced by Rep. Jeff Laszloffy (R) and supported by Senator Duane Grimes (R) and Terry Murphy (R-39). They argued that the new amendment would put the definition of marriage in the hands of the people, rather than the courts. They also argued that the acceptance of homosexual marriage, "[e]very public school in Montana would be required to teach children that same-sex marriage and homosexuality are perfectly normal." According to Laszloffy, Grimes and Murphy, this would cause Montanans to "lose the freedom to teach [their] children as [they] wish."

They also argued that if the initiative failed, small business employers could someday be required to provide expanded health coverage, retirement and fringe benefits to same sex "spouses" of employees, which could hurt Montana's economy and jobs. They also argued that churches would be "legally pressured" to perform same-sex weddings and that same-sex marriage is a "vast, untested, social experiment."

Opposition

CI-96 was opposed by Rep. Tom Facey (D-48), Karl Olson, Joan Hurdle, and Jennifer S. Hendricks. They argued that CI-96 denies basic rights to upstanding citizens of Montana and would ban churches and their clergy from legally solemnizing same-sex partnerships, infringing on the diverse religious beliefs of Montanans.

They also argued that the amendment would do nothing to actually strengthen marriages or the family unit in montana; "What CI-96 does do is diminish the freedom to be 'let alone' that Montanans have historically treasured."

Financing the campaign

The "yes" campaign spent about $10,700, while the "no" campaign spent about $51,500.

The major donors to the pro-campaign were:

• Montana Family Foundation, $6,765.
• Focus on the Family, $2,194.

The major donors to the anti-campaign were:

• Pride, Inc., $15,067.
• National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, $10,000.

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

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

External links

• Montana Constitutional Amendments
• Montana Initiative and Referendum
• Constitutional Initiative No. 96

References

---

This historical ballot measure article requires that the text of the measure be added to the page.