21 Oct On Your November Ballot: Prop. 3 Aims to Remove Same-Sex Marriage Ban From Calif. Constitution

(Photo courtesy of CBM)

By Edward Henderson | California Black Media

(CBM) – Prop. 3 would remove the ban on same-sex marriage from the California Constitution. The ban (Prop. 8) was added by voters in 2008; however, the United States Supreme Court has blocked the enforcement of the ban since 2013. The amendment would remove current language in the state constitution stating that marriage “is only between a man and a woman” and change it to “the right to marry is a fundamental right.”

State Sen. Scott Wiener, D-San Francisco, and Assemblymember Evan Low, D-Campbell, both members of the Legislative LGBTQ Caucus, introduced the constitutional amendment as a preemptive protection after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned federal abortion protections in 2022. Justice Clarence Thomas, a conservative, said that the court should also reconsider the constitutionality of same-sex marriage, but other conservatives on the bench disagreed.

California is currently the home of the nation’s largest LGBTQ+ population.

Supporters of the proposition believe the removal of the language in the state constitution would be guaranteed protection against any future attacks on a freedom that is already recognized by the Supreme Court.

Gov. Gavin Newsom is an outspoken supporter of the proposition. Newsom grabbed national attention in 2004 during his tenure as mayor of San Francisco when he issued marriage licenses to same sex couples, defying a federal ban on gay marriage.

“Same sex marriage is the law of the land and Prop. 8 has no place in our constitution,” Newsom said in an Oct. 14 statement. “It’s time that our laws affirm marriage equality regardless of who you are or who you love. California stands with the LGBTQ+ community and their right to live freely.”

Assemblymember Evan Low, who is part of the team who presented the amendment is on record stating: “California is ready for love, and these protections will protect against any future attempts to restrict marriage rights for same-sex and interracial couples.”

Opponents of the proposition argue that Prop. 3 is the beginning of a “slippery slope” that could serve as a precedent for other types of nontraditional unions, endangering youth, families and society in general. They also lean on Christian religious text that states marriage is a union between a man and a woman.

Jonathan Keller, president of California Family Council, is on record stating: “In a society like ours, you never can count on what people are willing to do for legal and financial and political reasons. And ACA 3, again, eliminates any of those safeguards, and it opens up Pandora’s Box. You could have siblings getting married. You could have nephews and nieces marrying uncles and aunts. You could have, potentially even mothers and fathers marrying each other, or mothers and children, or fathers and children marrying each other.”

A “yes” vote supports this constitutional amendment to:

• repeal Proposition 8 (2008), which defined marriage as a union between one man and one woman, and
• declare that a “right to marry is a fundamental right” in the California Constitution.

A “no” vote opposes this constitutional amendment, thus keeping Proposition 8 (2008), which defined marriage as a union between one man and one woman, in the California Constitution. However, there would be no change to who can currently get married under current California law.