Although it appeared destined for defeat Wednesday, state Assemblyman Mark Leno, D-San Francisco, isn't giving up on his gender-neutral marriage bill.

Assembly Bill 19, introduced by Leno, would redefine California marriage law to include same-sex couples.

The bill failed to pass the state Assembly Wednesday in a 35-37 vote against the proposal, with 10 Assembly members abstaining. Leno, using a parliamentary tactic, motioned for the bill to be reconsidered, thus putting its demise on hold for at least a day.

Leno is trying to convince some Democrats, who abstained, to reconsider and support the bill. He plans to bring the bill up for a vote again today, according to his press secretary Shannan Velayas.

Friday is the last day for the state Assembly to pass bills and send them to the state Senate.

If passed by the California Legislature, AB 19 would change the state family code, defining marriage as a civil contract between two persons instead of a civil contract between a man and a woman, according to Leno. The bill would also affirm the right of churches and other religious institutions to refuse to perform same-sex marriage ceremonies.

Opponents of the bill claim that AB 19 is unconstitutional because it violates Proposition 22, which California voters passed in 2000 and prevents the state from recognizing marriages of same-sex couples.

Leno claims that AB 19 does not violate Proposition 22 because the law did not change the criteria for issuing marriage licenses in California.

On April 14, San Francisco Superior Court Judge Richard Kramer ruled that Proposition 22 was unconstitutional because "no rational purpose exists for limiting marriage in this state to opposite-sex partners.''

Attorney General Bill Lockyer's office filed a notice of appeal in San Francisco Superior Court on Tuesday.

Almost one year is expected to pass before the appellate court issues a written opinion. Regardless of that ruling, all parties in the case agree the dispute seems sure to wind up in the state Supreme Court.

AB 19 passed the Assembly Judiciary Committee April 27 on a 6-3 vote and passed the Assembly Appropriations Committee May 25 on a 13-5 vote.

This entry was posted on Thursday, June 02, 2005 at 5:57 PM.