Marion County Judge Joseph Guimond ruled that the ballot question put to voters last November did not contain separate issues. Oregon's constitution requires that questions put to voters must not have multiple issues.

In arguments before the court in September Basic Rights Oregon lawyer Mark Johnson told Guimond that the measure makes at least two and maybe four separate amendments to the state constitution that should have been voted on separately.

Those arguments being:

First Claim: asserts that Measure 36 revises, rather than amends, the Oregon Constitution by violating the fundamental principles of liberty and justice on which the Constitution is based, by changing the allocation of power among the branches of government because it restricts the role of the courts in interpreting the constitution and by imposing a policy on local governments.

Second Claim:
While Measure 36 contains only one sentence, the addition of this provision to the Oregon Constitution creates multiple changes that should have been proposed as separate amendments. Because these multiple amendments and fundamental changes were all included under the umbrella of Measure 36, the measure violates constitutional provisions which require that voters must approve separate amendments with separate votes.

Guimond did agree with Basic Rights Oregon that Measure 36 affected more than one section of the constitution, but in a five page ruling said that the changes "are closely related, in that they are the same in each case--each portion of the constitution is amended to take away from same-sex couples the right to have a civil marriage even if that marriage is recognized by another jurisdiction."

Now it's on to appeals court... then no doubt the Oregon Supreme Court.

Posted by Bryan Harding

This entry was posted on Friday, November 04, 2005 at 11:40 AM. Want to discuss? Leave a comment below.