(Photo Credits: Gustavo Frazao from Shutterstock)
California and Colorado voters have taken significant steps to protect same-sex marriage by backing state measures that affirm marriage equality rights, ensuring added legal protections for LGBTQ+ communities. As anti-LGBTQ+ legislative efforts surface across various U.S. states, these measures signal strong local support for LGBTQ+ rights and show resistance to potential federal changes that could undermine the Supreme Court’s 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges decision, which legalized same-sex marriage nationwide.
According to The Associated Press, California voters have passed Proposition 3, securing the right to marriage for same-sex and interracial couples. Proposition 8, a 2008 amendment defining marriage as between a man and a woman, was invalidated by federal courts in 2013. However, it remained in the state constitution as a remnant of previous opposition to marriage equality. With the recent vote, Proposition 8 has now been fully removed, aligning California’s state constitution with federal law and its own long-standing progressive stance on LGBTQ+ issues.
Similarly, Colorado’s Amendment J garnered strong voter support to enshrine marriage equality directly into the state constitution. Voters in Colorado widely supported Amendment J, a move many see as necessary to prevent any rollback of marriage equality at the state level if federal protections were ever reconsidered.
State legislators in both California and Colorado emphasized that these measures act as safeguards for marriage equality, given the Supreme Court’s current ideological leanings and potential threats to precedents like Obergefell v. Hodges. By embedding these protections into state law, supporters believe they are fortifying LGBTQ+ rights at a local level, where they can be preserved regardless of federal shifts.
The measures in California and Colorado highlight a broader trend as numerous U.S. states seek to codify same-sex marriage and other LGBTQ+ protections into state law. Activists and lawmakers alike view these efforts as essential in a political landscape that has seen escalating attempts to limit LGBTQ+ rights.
Meanwhile, Hawaiians are voting on whether to repeal Section 23 of their constitution, which currently restricts marriage rights to opposite-sex couples only. This measure comes in response to fears that same-sex marriage protections could be jeopardized, especially after the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent overturning of Roe v. Wade raised questions about the permanence of established rights like those set by the 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges decision, which legalized same-sex marriage nationwide.
Reports from OpenSecrets reveal that there is little active opposition against this repeal, with only minor resistance from a few conservative organizations and elected officials and no substantial financial backing for anti-repeal efforts. Read here for more information.
useless non-obligatory states’ legislation because they can so they do. always obsessing about nothing but never confronting anything. nothing ever gets done because the emphasis is on “all show” but “no go”.
Reinforcing a defensive position is never a waste. I imagine that a lot of people wish that they had worked to repeal their state’s moribund laws against abortion that snapped back into place when Roe was overturned.
at-the-end-of-the-day, such legislation is perfunctory and redundant.
“… aligning California’s state constitution with federal law..”
Constitutional house cleaning. No change really.
Doesn’t really matter, at this point, there’s a whole new agenda about to be rolled out anyway, foe the obvious.
Yo…lots of folks voted for Trump including this Zebra Harris 226 Electoral Votes; Trump 295 Electoral Votes
The Harris campaign focused on women, Black men, first-time homebuyers, parents with children, Latinos, abortion for any reason, and anyone they could hope hated President Trump for any reason.
In the end, failing to demonstrate to the majority of US citizens, what it had to offer everyone who said they valued the economy, inflation, safer borders, and abortion managed by the States vs. Washington.
Hillary Clinton did much the same. And ended with failure.
The good news is that the new President has far too many national and global issues to concern himself with rehabilitating. Anything to do with LGTBQ folk won’t make his “To Do” list. Most likely, he’ll leave that up to the States to legislate, as he he’s made it abundantly clear on the Abortion issue, such concepts are not something for the Whitehouse or US Congress to legislate. .
Of course he could less about the LGBT community and any other minority group in that matter. He’ll leave that to the white conservative so-called Christian folks for that! That’s who his legislators consist of. LGBT rights will be at stake once again just when we thought we out of the clear.
Nobody voted on adding letters to the “community.” T is not gay. It’s not sexual orientation. It’s something completely different. It was a huge mistake to take on the burden of their agenda.
Be prepare to move to California or Colorado when all this shit begins… its coming !!!
yes we need THIS kind of legislation now that them repugnants are sweeping DC and taking office once again for another four more years .. we need PROTECTION, honey!