Your feedback ensures we stay focused on the facts that matter to you most—take our survey
Nevada Question 2, Marriage Regardless of Gender Amendment (2020)
| Nevada Question 2 | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Election date November 3, 2020 | |
| Topic Marriage and family and LGBT issues | |
Status Approved | |
| Type Constitutional amendment | Origin State legislature |
Nevada Question 2, the Marriage Regardless of Gender Amendment, was on the ballot in Nevada as a legislatively referred constitutional amendment on November 3, 2020.[1][2] It was approved.
A "yes" vote supported this constitutional amendment to recognize marriage as between couples regardless of gender; state that religious organizations and clergypersons have the right to refuse to solemnize a marriage; and repeal Question 2 (2002), which defined marriage as between a male person and female person. |
A "no" vote opposed this constitutional amendment, thus keeping Question 2 (2002), which defined marriage as between a male person and female person, in the Nevada Constitution. |
Election results
|
Nevada Question 2 |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Result | Votes | Percentage | ||
|
|
821,050 | 62.43% | ||
| No | 494,186 | 37.57% | ||
Overview
What did Question 2 change?
- See also: Text of the measure
Question 2 repealed Question 2 (2002), which amended the Nevada Constitution to state that marriage between a male and female was the only type of marriage recognized by the state. Question 2 (2020) instead defined marriage as between couples regardless of gender. It also stated that religious organizations and clergypersons have the right to refuse to solemnize a marriage.[2] The amendment had no practical effect on which couples could receive marriage licenses due to the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges (2015), which rendered laws defining marriage as between one man and one woman unconstitutional.
What states have repealed constitutional bans on same-sex marriage?
- See also: Constitutional bans on same-sex marriage
As of November 2020, Nevada was the first state to ask voters to repeal a constitutional amendment prohibiting same-sex marriage and/or defining marriage as between one man and one woman. As of November 2020, Nevada was one of 30 states with this type of constitutional amendment. Between 2015 (when Obergefell was issued) and 2020, none of the 30 states had referred ballot measures asking voters to repeal their constitutional amendments.
How did Question 2 get placed on the ballot?
- See also: Path to the ballot
According to Section 1 of Article 16 of the Nevada Constitution, an amendment proposed by the legislature must be approved by a majority in both the House and Senate in two consecutive legislative sessions. Question 2 was introduced as Assembly Joint Resolution 2 (AJR 2) on February 1, 2017. In the first legislative session, the Nevada State Assembly approved the measure in a vote of 27 to 14, and the Nevada State Senate approved the measure in a vote of 19 to 2. In the second legislative session, the Nevada State Senate approved it again by the same margin. In the second legislative session, the Nevada State Assembly approved the measure in a vote of 37 to 2. In the first session, one Republican and all 28 Democrats voted in favor of it. In the second session, nine Republicans and all 28 Democrats voted in favor of it.
Text of measure
Ballot question
The ballot question for Question 2 was as follows:[3]
| “ | Shall the Nevada Constitution be amended to: (1) remove an existing provision recognizing marriage as only between a male person and a female person and require the State of Nevada and its political subdivisions to recognize marriages of and issue marriage licenses to couples, regardless of gender; (2) require all legally valid marriages to be treated equally under the law; and (3) establish a right for religious organizations and clergy members to refuse to perform a marriage and provide that no person is entitled to make any claim against them for exercising that right?
Yes [ ] No [ ][4] |
” |
Ballot summary
The ballot summary for Question 2 was as follows:[3]
|
Constitutional changes
- See also: Article 1, Nevada Constitution
Question 2 amended Section 21 of Article 1 of the Nevada Constitution. The following underlined text was added, and struck-through text was deleted:[2]
Only a marriage between a male and female person shall be recognized and given effect in this state.
1. The State of Nevada and its political subdivisions shall recognize marriages and issue marriage licenses to couples regardless of gender.
2. Religious organizations and members of the clergy have the right to refuse to solemnize a marriage, and no person has the right to make any claim against a religious organization or member of the clergy for such a refusal.
3. All legally valid marriages must be treated equally under the law.[4]
Fiscal impact statement
The fiscal impact statement was as follows:[5]
| “ | Financial Impact—No
The Nevada Constitution provides that only a marriage between a male person and a female person may be recognized and given effect in Nevada. However, based on the United States Supreme Court’s ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges, marriages are currently recognized by the State and local governments in Nevada regardless of gender, irrespective of the language in the Nevada Constitution. Thus, there is no anticipated financial impact upon the State or local governments if Question 2 is approved by the voters.[4] |
” |
Readability score
- See also: Ballot measure readability scores, 2020
| Using the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL and Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) formulas, Ballotpedia scored the readability of the ballot title and summary for this measure. Readability scores are designed to indicate the reading difficulty of text. The Flesch-Kincaid formulas account for the number of words, syllables, and sentences in a text; they do not account for the difficulty of the ideas in the text. The secretary of state wrote the ballot language for this measure.
|
Support
Supporters
Officials
- Nevada State Senator Chris Brooks (D)
- Nevada State Senator Yvanna Cancela (D)
- Nevada State Senator James Ohrenschall (D)
- Nevada State Senator David R. Parks (D)
- Nevada State Senator Julia Ratti (D)
- Nevada State Senator Joyce Woodhouse (D)
- Nevada State Representative Shannon Bilbray-Axelrod (D)
- Nevada State Representative Richard Carrillo (D)
- Nevada State Representative Daniele Monroe-Moreno (D)
- Nevada State Representative Heidi Swank (D)
- Nevada State Representative Steve Yeager (D)
- Nevada Clark County Commissioner Richard Segerblom (D)
- Nevada Attorney General Aaron Ford (D)
Former Officials
- Former Nevada state representative Elliot T. Anderson (D)
- Former Nevada state representative Nelson Araujo (D)
- Former Nevada state representative Olivia Diaz (Nonpartisan)
- Former Nevada state representative Amber Joiner (D)
- Former Nevada state senator Mark A. Manendo (D)
- Former Nevada state representative Michael Sprinkle (D)
- Former Nevada state representative Tyrone Thompson (D)
Unions
Organizations
Arguments
Official arguments
The following arguments in support of Question 2 were included in the 2020 Nevada Voter Guide:[5]
| “ | With the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Obergefell v. Hodges, same-sex marriage has been legal across the country since 2015. Accordingly, the unenforceable provision in the Nevada Constitution that recognizes only a marriage between a man and a woman should be removed. Eliminating this discriminatory language and requiring the State of Nevada and its political subdivisions to recognize all legal marriages regardless of gender will ensure marriage equality for all Nevadans.
Although same-sex couples may enter into domestic partnerships in Nevada, a domestic partnership is not equal to a marriage. Unlike a marriage, a Nevada domestic partnership may or may not be recognized by other states. Moreover, the federal government does not grant domestic partnerships the same rights and benefits as marriage, including family-related Social Security benefits and joint filing of federal income tax returns. Remove discriminatory and unenforceable language from the Nevada Constitution and replace it with provisions guaranteeing equal marriage rights for all Nevadans. Vote 'yes' on Question 2.[4] |
” |
Opposition
Ballotpedia has not identified committees, organizations, or individuals opposing Question 2. If you are aware of opponents or opposing arguments, please send an email with a link to editor@ballotpedia.org.
Official arguments
The following arguments in opposition to Question 2 were included in the 2020 Nevada Voter Guide:[5]
| “ | At the general elections in both 2000 and 2002, Nevada voters ratified an amendment to the Nevada Constitution by approving an initiative petition—proposed by the people of Nevada—that defines marriage as being only between a man and a woman. This ballot question—proposed by the Legislature—asks voters to change the Nevada Constitution based on a 5-4 decision of the U.S. Supreme Court. If the U.S. Supreme Court were to overturn this decision, the definition of marriage currently in the Nevada Constitution would again be the controlling law of Nevada. The Nevada Constitution should reflect the will of the people of Nevada and not be changed in reaction to a court decision that can be overturned.
Recognizing same-sex marriage in the Nevada Constitution raises serious questions about the right to religious freedom guaranteed to every Nevadan. Traditionally, for some religions, marriage has been viewed as an institution typically recognizing only the union between one man and one woman. For some people, this traditional definition of marriage remains a core part of their religious beliefs, and they hold genuine and sincere religious convictions that same-sex marriage is incompatible with and undermines the sanctity of traditional marriage. There is no need to change the traditional definition of marriage to include same-sex couples. Domestic partnerships are a viable option for same-sex couples in Nevada. These partnerships were enacted under the current constitutional provisions and already afford many of the rights of marriage, including community property, inheritance without a will, and hospital visitation. The State has the ability to expand these rights, and therefore, approval of Question 2 is not necessary. Uphold the traditional definition of marriage as a union between one man and one woman that currently exists in the Nevada Constitution. Vote 'no on Question 2.[4] |
” |
Campaign finance
Ballotpedia identified one committee—Nevadans for Equality—registered in support of Question 2. The committee reported $237,655.83 in cash and in-kind contributions.[6]
| Cash Contributions | In-Kind Contributions | Total Contributions | Cash Expenditures | Total Expenditures | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Support | $100,700.00 | $136,955.83 | $237,655.83 | $98,280.42 | $235,236.25 |
| Oppose | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 |
| Total | $100,700.00 | $136,955.83 | $237,655.83 | $98,280.42 | $235,236.25 |
Support
The following table includes contribution and expenditure totals for the committees in support of Question 2:[6]
| Committees in support of Question 2 | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Committee | Cash Contributions | In-Kind Contributions | Total Contributions | Cash Expenditures | Total Expenditures |
| Nevadans for Equality | $100,700.00 | $136,955.83 | $237,655.83 | $98,280.42 | $235,236.25 |
| Total | $100,700.00 | $136,955.83 | $237,655.83 | $98,280.42 | $235,236.25 |
Top donors
The following chart lists the top donors to the campaigns in support of Question 2:[6]
| Donor | Cash Contributions | In-Kind Contributions | Total Contributions |
|---|---|---|---|
| Silver State Equality | $0.00 | $87,300.00 | $87,300.00 |
| Nevada Alliance | $30,700.00 | $1,500.00 | $32,200.00 |
| Human Rights Campaign | $10,000.00 | $9,214.64 | $19,214.64 |
| Battle Born Progress | $10,000.00 | $8,108.00 | $18,108.00 |
| ACLU of Nevada | $10,000.00 | $799.58 | $10,799.58 |
Opposition
Ballotpedia did not identify a campaign organized in opposition to Question 2.
Methodology
To read Ballotpedia's methodology for covering ballot measure campaign finance information, click here.
Background
Obergefell v. Hodges (2015)
In 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court held in a 5-4 decision (Obergefell v. Hodges) that same-sex marriage is protected under the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment. The decision had the effect of rendering laws defining marriage as between one man and one woman, insofar as the laws prevented same-sex couples from marrying, unenforceable.
Before Obergefell v. Hodges, same-sex marriage was legal in 38 states. In 27 of the 38 states, same-sex marriage was legalized by federal or state court rulings. In the remaining 11 states, same-sex marriage was legalized by statute.
Constitutional bans on same-sex marriage
As of 2019, Nevada was one of 30 states with a constitutional provision prohibiting same-sex marriage and/or defining marriage as between one man and one woman. In Obergefell v. Hodges (2015), the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the state bans on same-sex marriage as violating the U.S. Constitution. The language prohibiting same-sex marriage remained in the state constitutions. Between 2015 and 2019, none of the 30 states had referred ballot measures asking voters to repeal their constitutional amendments. With Assembly Joint Resolution 2 in 2019, Nevada became the first state to ask voters to repeal a state constitutional ban on same-sex marriage. The following is a map of the states with constitutional amendments prohibiting same-sex marriage and/or defining marriage as between one man and one woman in 2019:
Timeline of constitutional bans
The first state to pass a constitutional amendment defining marriage as between one man and one woman was Alaska in 1998. Between 1998 and 2012, 33 constitutional amendments designed to ban same-sex marriage appeared on the ballot. Of those 33, voters approved 31 (93.9 percent). Arizona, which rejected a constitutional amendment in 2006, passed one in 2008. Voters in Minnesota rejected a constitutional amendment in 2012. Thirteen constitutional amendments appeared on the ballot in 2004.
| Year | Measure | Outcome |
|---|---|---|
| 1998 | Alaska Measure 2 |
|
| 2000 | Nebraska Initiative 416 |
|
| 2000 | Nevada Question 2 |
|
| 2002 | Nevada Question 2 |
|
| 2004 | Arkansas Amendment 3 |
|
| 2004 | Georgia Question 1 |
|
| 2004 | Kentucky Amendment |
|
| 2004 | Louisiana Question 1 |
|
| 2004 | Michigan Proposal 2 |
|
| 2004 | Mississippi Amendment 1 |
|
| 2004 | Missouri Amendment 2 |
|
| 2004 | Montana Initiative 96 |
|
| 2004 | North Dakota Measure 1 |
|
| 2004 | Ohio Issue 1 |
|
| 2004 | Oklahoma Question 711 |
|
| 2004 | Oregon Measure 36 |
|
| 2004 | Utah Amendment 3 |
|
| 2005 | Kansas Amendment |
|
| 2005 | Texas Proposition 2 |
|
| 2006 | Alabama Amendment 774 |
|
| 2006 | Arizona Proposition 107 | 
|
| 2006 | Colorado Initiative 43 |
|
| 2006 | Idaho HJR 2 |
|
| 2006 | South Carolina Amendment 1 |
|
| 2006 | South Dakota Amendment C |
|
| 2006 | Tennessee Amendment 1 |
|
| 2006 | Virginia Question 1 |
|
| 2006 | Wisconsin Question 1 |
|
| 2008 | Arizona Proposition 102 |
|
| 2008 | California Proposition 8 |
|
| 2008 | Florida Amendment 2 |
|
| 2012 | Minnesota Amendment 1 |
|
| 2012 | North Carolina Amendment 1 |
|
In 2012, Maine, Washington, and Maryland voted on ballot measures related to statutory same-sex marriage bans. Voters in Maine approved an indirect initiated state statute, Question 1, which overturned a voter-approved 2009 ballot measure that banned same-sex marriage in the state. Voters in Washington approved Veto Referendum 74, which upheld a law that allowed same-sex marriages. In Maryland, voters upheld a similar law when they approved Question 6, which was also a veto referendum.
Nevada Question 2 of 2000 and 2002
- See also: Nevada Question 2 (2000) and Nevada Question 2 (2002)
In 2000, a citizen-initiated constitutional amendment, titled Question 2, was on the ballot in Nevada. Question 2 defined marriage as between one male and one female. In 2000, 69.62 percent of voters approved Question 2. In Nevada, a citizen-initiated constitutional amendment needs to be approved at two successive general elections. Therefore, Question 2 was on the ballot again in 2002, when 67 percent of voters approved the constitutional amendment. Nevada was the third state to pass a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage.
Path to the ballot
- See also: Amending the Nevada Constitution
In Nevada, a majority vote is required in two successive sessions of the Nevada State Legislature to place an amendment on the ballot.
2017 legislative session
Question 2 was introduced as Assembly Joint Resolution 2 (AJR 2) on February 1, 2017. The Nevada State Assembly approved the measure, 27 to 14 with one member excused, on March 9, 2017. The Nevada Senate voted to amend the measure on April 25, 2017. The amendment to the measure was designed to provide religious organizations and clergy with the right to refuse to solemnize a marriage. On May 1, 2017, the Senate voted 19 to two to pass the measure. As the measure was altered in the state Senate, a concurrence vote of the amended AJR 2 was needed in the state Assembly. On May 2, 2017, the Assembly approved the Senate's amendment to AJR 2.[1]
Note: The concurrence vote on May 2, 2017, was not recorded for publication or was a voice vote.
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2019 legislative session
Both chambers of the state legislature needed to pass AJR 8 during the 2019 legislative session to refer the amendment to the ballot for the election on November 3, 2020.
On March 29, 2019, the Nevada State Assembly approved AJR 8, with 37 members supporting the amendment, two members opposing the amendment, and two members not voting. The two members who opposed AJR 8 were Rep. John Ellison (R-33) and Rep. Jim Wheeler (R-39)
On May 23, 2019, the Nevada State Senate approved AJR 8, with 19 senators supporting the amendment and two senators opposing the amendment. The two senators who opposed AJR 8 were Sen. Ira Hansen (R-14) and Sen. Marcia Washington (D-4)[7]
As AJR 8 passed both chambers of the legislature in 2017 and 2019, Question 2 was referred to the ballot for the election on November 3, 2020.
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
How to cast a vote
- See also: Voting in Nevada
Click "Show" to learn more about voter registration, identification requirements, and poll times in Nevada.
| How to cast a vote in Nevada | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Poll timesAll polling places in Nevada are open from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. local time. An individual who is in line at the time polls close must be allowed to vote.[8][9] Registration requirements
To register to vote in Nevada, each applicant must be must a citizen of the United States, a resident of Nevada for at least 30 days before the election, and at least 18 years old by the day of the election. Seventeen-year-olds can preregister to vote. Anyone who has been declared mentally incompetent by a court may not register to vote.[10] A voter registration application can be completed in person at the county clerk’s office, the Department of Motor Vehicles, other social service agencies, or college campuses. In-person registration must be completed 28 days before regular elections; registration forms submitted by mail must be postmarked by the same day. Online applications must be submitted by the Thursday before regular elections.[11][10]
Automatic registrationNevada automatically registers eligible individuals to vote through the Department of Motor Vehicles.[12] Online registration
Nevada has implemented an online voter registration system. Residents can register to vote by visiting this website. Same-day registrationNevada allows same-day voter registration at polling places during early voting and on election day.[10] Residency requirementsIn order to register to vote in Nevada, applicants must be a resident of the state for at least 30 days prior to the election.[10] Verification of citizenshipNevada does not require proof of citizenship for voter registration.[13] An individual applying to register to vote must attest that they are a U.S. citizen under penalty of perjury. All 49 states with voter registration systems require applicants to declare that they are U.S. citizens in order to register to vote in state and federal elections, under penalty of perjury or other punishment.[14] Seven states — Alabama, Arizona, Georgia, Kansas, Louisiana, New Hampshire, and Wyoming — have laws requiring verification of citizenship at the time of voter registration, whether in effect or not. In three states — California, Maryland, and Vermont — at least one local jurisdiction allows noncitizens to vote in some local elections. Noncitizens registering to vote in those elections must complete a voter registration application provided by the local jurisdiction and are not eligible to register as state or federal voters. Verifying your registrationThe Nevada Secretary of State’s office allows residents to check their voter registration status online by visiting this website.
Voter ID requirementsNevada does not require voters to present identification while voting, in most cases. A voter in Nevada must sign his or her name in the election board register at his or her polling place. The signature is compared with the signature on the voter's original application to vote or another form of identification, such as a driver's license, a state identification card, military identification, or another government-issued ID.[15] | |||||
See also
External links
Footnotes
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 Nevada Legislature, "AJR 2 Overview," accessed May 3, 2017
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 Nevada Legislature, "Assembly Joint Resolution No. 2," accessed May 3, 2017
- ↑ 3.0 3.1 Nevada Secretary of State, "Question 2," accessed September 7, 2020
- ↑ 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source. Cite error: Invalid
<ref>tag; name "quotedisclaimer" defined multiple times with different content Cite error: Invalid<ref>tag; name "quotedisclaimer" defined multiple times with different content Cite error: Invalid<ref>tag; name "quotedisclaimer" defined multiple times with different content Cite error: Invalid<ref>tag; name "quotedisclaimer" defined multiple times with different content - ↑ 5.0 5.1 5.2 Nevada Secretary of State, "Question 2," accessed September 29, 2020
- ↑ 6.0 6.1 6.2 Nevada Secretary of State, "Nevadans for Equality" accessed January 25, 2020
- ↑ Nevada State Legislature, "AJR 8 (2019)," accessed April 1, 2019
- ↑ Nevada Revised Statutes, "Title 24, Chapter 293, Section 273," accessed April 17, 2023
- ↑ ACLU of Nevada, "Know Your Voting Rights - Voting in Nevada," accessed April 17, 2023
- ↑ 10.0 10.1 10.2 10.3 Nevada Secretary of State, “Elections,” accessed October 3, 2024
- ↑ Nevada Secretary of State, “Registering to Vote,” accessed April 17, 2023
- ↑ Nevada Department of Motor Vehicles, “Voter Registration,” accessed April 17, 2023
- ↑ The Nevada Independent, “The Indy Explains: How does Nevada verify a voter's eligibility?” April 23, 2017
- ↑ Under federal law, the national mail voter registration application (a version of which is in use in all states with voter registration systems) requires applicants to indicate that they are U.S. citizens in order to complete an application to vote in state or federal elections, but does not require voters to provide documentary proof of citizenship. According to the U.S. Department of Justice, the application "may require only the minimum amount of information necessary to prevent duplicate voter registrations and permit State officials both to determine the eligibility of the applicant to vote and to administer the voting process."
- ↑ Nevada Revised Statutes, "NRS 293.277 Conditions for entitlement of person to vote; forms of identification to identify registered voter." accessed April 17, 2023
