Implications for Arizona


On Tuesday, two judges on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled the California marriage amendment approved by a vote of the people is unconstitutional. Once again, we see judges making law, not interpreting law. Read the opinion here. Incredibly the judges can find no “rational basis” for Californians to uphold marriage.

Thankfully, this is not the final chapter in the fight to protect marriage. Let’s all remember that this is the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals – the most overturned circuit court in the country. Shortly after the decision was released, our friends at Alliance Defense Fund and ProtectMarriage.com announced they would be appealing the decision.

There are two key “take-aways” from the opinion:

  1. When states adopt laws granting legal status and other recognition to individuals on the basis of their sexual orientation, the courts are more likely to say you can’t define marriage as only the union of one man and one woman. This is one problem with civil unions, domestic partnerships, and so-called non-discrimination policies. These laws set up the argument that you cannot grant special legal recognition to persons on the basis of their sexual orientation yet deny them marriage. CAP continues to oppose efforts at the legislature to pass such laws.
  2. The U.S. President nominates and the U.S. Senate confirms the judges who sit on the Ninth Circuit and the U.S. Supreme Courts. When you cast your vote in 2012, know your vote counts in deciding who gets to nominate and confirm judges.

Check out the Marriage Counterfeits Issue Brief on AZPolicyPages.com to learn more about this topic.

Now We’re Rolling
We had a full week at the state legislature. Six CAP-supported bills were heard either in committee or on the House or Senate Floor. Here are some of the highlights:

  • The “wrongful life” bill was heard in the Senate Health committee. Sponsored by Sen. Nancy Barto, SB 1359 prohibits so-called “wrongful life” and “wrongful birth” lawsuits against medical professionals for not diagnosing a birth defect of a preborn child, which, if known, would have led to the child being aborted. This bill is about ensuring that every life – whether born with a disability or not – is valued. CAP Legal Counsel Deborah Sheasby testified in support, drawing many questions from those who favor abortion. The bill passed 3-2.
  • The Senate Government Reform Committee passed by a 4-2-1 vote legislation to protect the rights of conscience of individuals who are licensed or certified by the state. Sponsored by Senator Steve Yarbrough, SB 1365 ensures no professional licensed by the state can be discriminated against because of the practice of his or her faith. I testified in support of the bill, along with ADF Senior Legal Counsel Joe Infanco.
  • Deborah also testified for another CAP-supported bill passed with bi-partisan support in the House Education Committee. HB 2770 passed 7-1 and protects college and university professors from being denied tenure because of their religious convictions or political beliefs. Read more about why Rep. Tom Forese sponsored this legislation in the East Valley Tribune.

The other big news of the week is the CAP-supported Mother’s Health and Safety Act introduced by Representative Kimberly Yee. You can read more about HB 2838 from the Associated Press. And, be sure to check out CAP’s Bill Tracker for current status on our bills and to access our Fact Sheets. Several more bills will be heard in committees next week. We’d appreciate your prayers as we work these bills through the legislative process.

About Center for Arizona Policy

Comments

  1. Herrod seems to be not be disappointed that a vote of the people would result in the approval of an unconstitutional measure. Wow, that’s some double negativism.

    “People” along with judges and lawmakers do unconstitutional stuff all the time. Same with the executive branch. I wouldn’t place my faith in any one of these parties, but (as does the constitution) I place faith in all of them.

    • Conservative American says:

      Wilson wrote: “Herrod seems to be not be disappointed that a vote of the people would result in the approval of an unconstitutional measure.”

      Aren’t you forgetting the possibility of an appeal to SCOTUS? A decision from SCOTUS could have the effect of establishing Proposition 8 as constitutional.

      You’re jumping the gun. It ain’t over till the fat lady sings! ;-)

  2. Nordine Crub says:

    By “fat lady” I presume you mean Maggie Gallegher.

    • Conservative American says:

      No, I mean the lady who appears in the photo in you post. ;-)

      LOL! Sorry, couldn’t resist, Nordine. You created the prefect opening!

Speak Your Mind

*