Source: Sacramento Bee, San Francisco Chronicle
A ballot label that says Proposition 8 "eliminates (the) right of same-sex couples to marry" will remain intact after a Sacramento County judge today dismissed a challenge by supporters of the measure.
The language will accompany the measure banning gay and lesbian marriages in California on every ballot and in every voter pamphlet, unless an appeals court intervenes before the close of business Monday, the deadline for sending election material to the state printer.
Religious conservatives who sponsored Prop. 8 objected vehemently to the ballot language ordered by Attorney General Jerry Brown, saying the new wording was a biased argument -- not a neutral description -- and was designed to encourage voters to oppose the measure.
Before the Supreme Court struck down California's previous marriage restrictions on May 15, Brown had titled the initiative as a "Limit on Marriage," the label on petitions that collected 1.2 million signatures.
But after the court ruled 4-3 that the previous ban on same-sex marriage violated the California Constitution, Brown retitled the ballot measure, saying it now eliminated rights that the court had established.
At a hearing Thursday, Andrew Pugno, lawyer for the Prop. 8 sponsors, told Sacramento County Judge Timothy Frawley that the new ballot language would "throw the legitimacy of the election into question because it is so one-sided."
The fairest title, Prop. 8 backers said, would be the actual text of the initiative: "Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California."
But Frawley disagreed that Brown acted in favor of opponents of the measure when he changed the ballot title.
"Petitioner has failed to explain why the term 'eliminates' is inherently argumentative, while the term 'limit' is not," Frawley, who heard arguments in the case on Thursday, said in a ruling rendered Friday.
In Friday's order, Frawley said the Supreme Court's ruling "unequivocally held that same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry." As a consequence, he said, a ballot title based on the premise that such a right exists "is not argumentative, prejudicial or controversial."
The judge also rejected the contention of opponents that the measure's title and summary is misleading because it fails to distinguish between the initiative's 'purpose' and 'effects', Sacramento Bee reports.
"The attorney general is not required to make any such distinction, and even if he were, petitioner has not shown that a meaningful distinction exists between the purpose and effects of this particular initiative," the judge wrote.
"The attorney general did not abuse his discretion in concluding that the chief purpose and effect of the initiative is to eliminate the right of same-sex couples to marry," wrote Frawley, a former Sacramento prosecutor who was appointed to the bench by Gov. Gray Davis in 2002.
The Yes on 8 campaign was indignant, San Francisco Chronicle reports.
Backers of Prop. 8 rushed to an appellate court Friday after Frawley rejected their challenge.
"Since the Superior Court would not exercise its authority to protect voters against misleading language, we will ask the appellate court to do so," said Pugno before filing an emergency motion with the state Court of Appeal.
Geoff Kors, a spokesman for the No on Proposition 8 campaign, said Frawley's ruling was not unexpected.
"There's really no surprise that a court would find that the primary purpose of this is to eliminate the right of same-sex couples to marry," Kors said.
He added, "It's important that voters know exactly what this measure would do, which is to change the Constitution to eliminate a fundamental right, the right to marry, from one group of people."
Brown said the lawsuit against his ballot title "was more about politics than the law."
Frawley also decided a variety of other Prop. 8 issues Friday, leaving largely intact the opposing sides' ballot arguments, including the Yes on 8 campaign's disputed claim that the measure would protect kindergartners from classroom indoctrination on the virtues of same-sex marriage.
Source: Gay marriage ballot title won't change | Sacramento Bee
Judge refuses to order change in Prop. 8 title | San Francisco Chronicle