PHOENIX — The Arizona Supreme Court today echoed a lower court’s decision this month, ruling that Proposition 107, Arizona’s marriage protection amendment, does not violate the state constitution’s “single subject” rule and will appear on the November ballot.
“The Arizona Supreme Court rightly understood that this amendment is a clear, straightforward proposition with one purpose: protecting marriage,” said ADF Senior Counsel Glen Lavy. “Those seeking to redefine marriage unsuccessfully tried to evade the democratic process by misusing a technical provision of the state constitution. Arizona voters deserve to have a say in the matter of marriage and will have the opportunity to do so.”
ADF attorneys and Peter Gentala, general counsel for The Center for Arizona Policy, represent Protect Marriage Arizona, the organization that collected the signatures to have the amendment placed on the November ballot. A group known as “Arizona Together” challenged the proposed initiative, claiming that the amendment violates the state’s rule against voter initiatives that address more than one subject.
The court’s ruling today in
Arizona Together v. Brewer upholds an Aug. 10 decision by a Maricopa County Superior Court judge who found that the proposed marriage amendment has one purpose: protecting marriage as the union of a man and a woman by preventing redefinition and marriage substitutes (
www.telladf.org/news/story.aspx?cid=3822).
“Every time this issue has been presented to the voters, it has passed overwhelmingly, by an average of 70 percent,” said Lavy. “We are confident that Arizonans will adopt Proposition 107 in order to protect marriage for what it is--a unique union between one man and one woman.”
For more information on the battle to protect marriage, visit
www.domawatch.org.
ADF is a legal alliance defending the right to hear and speak the Truth through strategy, training, funding, and litigation.
www.telladf.org www.domawatch.org
Related information
ADF Media Clip: Senior Counsel Glen Lavy says the Arizona Supreme Court clearly ruled appropriately. (21 seconds)
Order from Arizona Supreme Court