Wisconsin Question 1, Definition of Marriage Amendment (2006)
| Wisconsin Question 1 | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
| Election date |
|
| Topic Family-related policy and LGBTQ issues |
|
| Status |
|
| Type Legislatively referred constitutional amendment |
Origin |
Wisconsin Question 1 was on the ballot as a legislatively referred constitutional amendment in Wisconsin on November 7, 2006. It was approved. On June 6, 2014, Question 1 was overturned by District Court Judge Barbara Crabb.
A “yes” vote supported adding a section to the constitution to provide that only marriage between a man and a woman will be recognized as valid. |
A “no” vote opposed adding a section to the constitution to provide that only marriage between a man and a woman will be recognized as valid. |
Election results
|
Wisconsin Question 1 |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Result | Votes | Percentage | ||
|
|
1,264,310 | 59.43% | ||
| No | 862,924 | 40.57% | ||
Overview
What was this amendment designed to do?
This amendment was designed to define marriage in the state as between one man and one woman, and that no other marriage or similar union would be recognized in the state.
Aftermath
U.S. District Court
In February 2014, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed a lawsuit challenging this constitutional amendment. The lead plaintiffs were Virginia Wolf and Carol Schumacher, who were married in Minnesota. The lawsuit alleged that the ban on same-sex marriage violated due process protections by limiting the right to marry and equal protection based on sexual orientation and gender discrimination.[1] The case was heard in the United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin by Judge Barbara Crabb.[2]
On June 6, 2014, Judge Crabb ruled in favor of the plaintiffs and overturned the ban put in place by Question 1.[3] In her opinion, Judge Crabb refuted the state's argument regarding the history of "traditional marriages," saying,
| “ | As an initial matter, defendants and amici have overstated their argument. Throughout history, the most 'traditional' form of marriage has not been between one man and one woman, but between one man and multiple women, which presumably is not a tradition that defendants and amici would like to continue.[4][5] | ” |
| —Judge Barbara Crabb | ||
Judge Crabb refused a state request made by Attorney General of Wisconsin J.B. Van Hollen to halt marriages from taking place until after an appeal is heard on June 10, 2014.[6]
Seventh Circuit Court
On September 4, 2014, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals declared the marriage ban unconstitutional. The three-judge panel unanimously voted to uphold lower court decisions that reversed marriage restrictions. The decision was stayed, pending action by the United States Supreme Court, as state officials appealed the decision to the Supreme Court.[7]
On October 6, 2014, the Supreme Court of the United States declined to hear the case, thus allowing the ruling of the Seventh Circuit Court to stand and legalizing same-sex marriage in Wisconsin.[8]
Text of measure
Ballot title
The ballot title for Question 1 was as follows:
| “ | Marriage. Shall section 13 of article XIII of the constitution be created to provide that only a marriage between one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in this state and that a legal status identical or substantially similar to that of marriage for unmarried individuals shall not be valid or recognized in this state? | ” |
Constitutional changes
Marriage. Section 13. Only a marriage between one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in this state. A legal status identical or substantially similar to that of marriage for unmarried individuals shall not be valid or recognized in this state.[9][5]
Support
Vote Yes for Marriage led the campaign in support of the amendment.
Supporters
Organizations
Arguments
Opposition
Fair Wisconsin led the campaign opposing the amendment.
Opponents
Organizations
Arguments
Background
Related measures
Between 1998 and 2012, voters in 30 states approved ballot measures that defined marriage as between one male and one female or otherwise prohibited same-sex marriage. The U.S. Supreme Court invalidated bans on same-sex marriage in the case Obergefell v. Hodges in 2015.
- 1998: Alaska
- 2000: Nebraska
- 2002: Nevada
- 2004: Arkansas
- 2004: Georgia
- 2004: Kentucky
- 2004: Louisiana
- 2004: Michigan
- 2004: Mississippi
- 2004: Missouri
- 2004: Montana
- 2004: North Dakota
- 2004: Ohio
- 2004: Oklahoma
- 2004: Oregon
- 2004: Utah
- 2005: Kansas
- 2005: Texas
- 2006: Alabama
- 2006: Colorado
- 2006: Idaho
- 2006: South Carolina
- 2006: South Dakota
- 2006: Tennessee
- 2006: Virginia
- 2006: Wisconsin
- 2008: Arizona
- 2008: California
- 2008: Florida
- 2012: North Carolina
Path to the ballot
- See also: Amending the Wisconsin Constitution
A simple majority vote is required during two legislative sessions for the Wisconsin State Legislature to place a constitutional amendment on the ballot. That amounts to a minimum of 50 votes in the Wisconsin State Assembly and 17 votes in the Wisconsin State Senate, assuming no vacancies. Amendments do not require the governor's signature to be referred to the ballot.
See also
Footnotes
- ↑ BuzzFeed Politics, "ACLU Filing Lawsuit In Wisconsin Seeking Marriage Equality," February 3, 2014
- ↑ U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin, "OPINION and ORDER 14-cv-64-bbc," accessed June 11, 2014
- ↑ Huffington Post, "Wisconsin Gay Marriage Ban Struck Down By Federal Judge," June 6, 2014
- ↑ Huffington Post, "Federal Judge To Wisconsin: You Know 'Traditional' Marriage Was Polygamy, Right?" June 6, 2014
- ↑ 5.0 5.1 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source. Cite error: Invalid
<ref>tag; name "quotedisclaimer" defined multiple times with different content - ↑ Chicago Tribune, "Federal judge refuses to halt gay weddings in Wisconsin," June 10, 2014
- ↑ The New York Times, "Gay-Marriage Bans Fall in Wisconsin and Indiana," September 4, 2014
- ↑ The Guardian, "US supreme court decision paves way for sweeping expansion of gay rights," October 6, 2014
- ↑ The Wisconsin Blue Book 2007-2008, p.887
 |
State of Wisconsin Madison (capital) |
|---|---|
| Elections |
What's on my ballot? | Elections in 2025 | How to vote | How to run for office | Ballot measures |
| Government |
Who represents me? | U.S. President | U.S. Congress | Federal courts | State executives | State legislature | State and local courts | Counties | Cities | School districts | Public policy |
