South Dakota Amendment C, Definition of Marriage and Prohibition of Civil Unions Amendment (2006)

South Dakota Amendment C
Election date November 7, 2006
Topic Family-related policy and LGBTQ issues
Status Overturned
Type Legislatively referred constitutional amendment	Origin State legislature

South Dakota Amendment C was on the ballot as a legislatively referred constitutional amendment in South Dakota on November 7, 2006.

A "yes" vote supports amending the constitution to provide that only a marriage between a man and a woman would be recognized in the state, and would prohibit civil unions and domestic partnerships between two or more people regardless of sex.

A "no" vote opposes amending the constitution to provide that only a marriage between a man and a woman would be recognized in the state.

Election results

South Dakota Amendment C
Result		Votes	Percentage
Yes		172,305	51.83%
No		160,152	48.17%

Results are officially certified.

Source

Overview

What was this amendment designed to do?

This measure was designed to amend the state constitution to provide that only marriage between a man and a woman would be recognized in the state. It also was designed to prohibit civil unions and domestic partnerships between to or more people, regardless of sex.

Aftermath

U.S. District Court

Judge Karen Schreier of the US District Court for South Dakota struck down the state's constitutional ban on same-sex marriage on January 12, 2015. The decision, however, was stayed pending a possible appeal by the state to the US Eighth District Court of Appeals.

Judge Schreier said the ban violated the federal constitution because it "deprives same-sex citizens of a fundamental right, and that classification is not narrowly tailored to serve a compelling state interest."

Attorney General Marty Jackley (R) said the state would appeal the ruling, contending:

“	It remains the State's position that the institution of marriage should be defined by the voters of South Dakota and not the federal courts. Because this case presents substantial legal questions and substantial public interest, the Federal Court has stayed its judgment allowing South Dakota law to remain in effect pending the appeal.	”
—Attorney General Marty Jackley

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. The ruling overturned bans on same-sex marriage.

Justice Anthony Kennedy authored the opinion and Justices Ruth Bader 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.

Text of measure

Ballot title

The ballot title for Amendment C was as follows:

“

Title: An Amendment to Article XXI of the South Dakota Constitution, relating to marriage. Attorney General Explanation South Dakota statutes currently limit marriage to unions between a man and a woman. However, the State Constitution does not address marriage. Amendment C would amend the State Constitution to allow and recognize marriage only between a man and a woman. It would also prohibit the Legislature from allowing or recognizing civil unions, domestic partnerships or other quasi-marital relationships between two or more persons regardless of sex. A vote “Yes” will change the Constitution. A vote “No” will leave the Constitution as it is.

”

Full Text

The full text of this measure is available here.

Support

The South Dakota Family Policy Council led the campaign in support of the amendment.

Supporters

Organizations

• Alliance Defense Fund

Arguments

• Stephen J. Wesolick, attorney with the Alliance Defense Fund: "Marriage between one man and one woman is the cornerstone institution in our society. There is overwhelming and indisputable evidence that children raised by their mother and father do better in school, are less likely to commit crimes, have less premarital sex, and are healthier emotionally and physically … Yet political special interests are attempting to trump what is clearly in the best interests of families and children."

Official Arguments

• Voter Guide Official Argument, by Rep. Elizabeth Kraus: "Amendment C affirms the traditional understanding of marriage in South Dakota. The amendment is designed to make clear what marriage is and what marriage is not. The amendment merely reflects what South Dakota citizens have always understood—that marriage is a union between one man and one woman and that the State of South Dakota should not recognize any other kind of “marriage” or “quasi-marital relationship,” whether called a “civil union,” a “domestic partnership,” or by any other newly-coined name. Note that the amendment does not change the fact that a marriage may be performed in either a religious or a civil ceremony; marriages solemnized in a civil ceremony are civil marriages, not “civil unions.” “Civil union” is a term used for relationships that are not between one man and one woman. This amendment will not stop unmarried couples from making any other legal contracts with one another. They will still be able to buy property together, make medical decisions for each other, or leave estates to one another. Private companies in South Dakota will still be able to allow any benefits they choose for unmarried couples and their dependents. As an amendment to the state constitution, it will prevent state judges from changing the definition of marriage, as has happened in several other states. Ultimately, this issue is about our children. Any other kind of “marriage” – or “civil union” or “domestic partnership” – by definition, creates motherless or fatherless families. To intentionally deprive children of the ideal situation of having both a mother and a father would do those children a great harm. Please vote YES on Amendment C to protect marriage as a union between one man and one woman."

Opposition

South Dakotans Against Discrimination led the campaign opposing the amendment.

Opponents

Organizations

• ACLU of the Dakotas
• Human Rights Campaign

Arguments

• Todd D. Epp, attorney for South Dakotans Against Discrimination: "Amendment C will impact more than just gay South Dakotans. Gays will not be getting married in South Dakota on Nov. 8, regardless of the vote on “C” on Nov. 7. Amendment C will adversely impact heterosexual South Dakotans in ways that are not fully understood. Other states have muddied their state constitutions with similar measures and have created more legal problems than they have solved."

Official Arguments

• Voter Guide Official Argument, by Jon Hoadley of South Dakotans Against Discrimination: "Do you know what “quasi-marital” means? Are “civil unions” all marriages performed at the courthouse? Did you know “domestic partnerships” appears in law only relating to in-state business contracts? These terms are not legally defined and require judges and lawsuits to legislate their meaning, wasting taxpayer dollars. In South Dakota, most people believe marriage is between a man and a woman, and in 1996, this was written into state law. Amendment C forces voters to decide two issues at once. First, should we change our Constitution when a law is already on the books? Second, should we potentially ban all legal recognition of relationships between unmarried adults? The answer to both questions is NO. Voting NO doesn’t make gay marriage legal. Voting NO keeps South Dakota the way it is right now. Voting NO tells legislators that we care about these issues, but not at the risk of creating unintended consequences. Voting yes had the unintended consequence of taking away health care for many unmarried families in Michigan. Voting yes had the unintended consequence of removing domestic violence protections for unmarried straight couples in Ohio. Changing the Constitution tied judges’ hands and forced them to let abusers go free."

Background

Related measures

See also: History of same-sex marriage ballot measures

Between 1998 and 2012, voters in 30 states approved ballot measures that defined marriage as between one male and one female or otherwise prohibited same-sex marriage. The U.S. Supreme Court invalidated bans on same-sex marriage in the case Obergefell v. Hodges in 2015.

• 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

Path to the ballot

A simple majority vote is required during one legislative session for the South Dakota State Legislature to place a constitutional amendment on the ballot. That amounts to a minimum of 36 votes in the South Dakota House of Representatives and 18 votes in the South Dakota State Senate, assuming no vacancies. Amendments do not require the governor's signature to be referred to the ballot.

See also

2006 Measures

• 2006 Measures
• LGBTQ issues on the ballot
• Family-related policy on the ballot
• 2006 legislative sessions

South Dakota

• South Dakota ballot measures
• South Dakota ballot measure laws

News and analysis

• Ballot measure lawsuits
• Ballot measure readability
• Ballot measure polls

External links

• South Dakota Political Almanac, South Dakota Constitutional Amendments, Initiatives and Referendums 1970-2010
• South Dakota Secretary of State: 2006 Ballot Question Text