Same-sex marriage in Arizona

Last updated

Same-sex marriage has been legal in Arizona since October 17, 2014. The U.S. state had denied marriage rights to same-sex couples by statute since 1996 and by an amendment to its State Constitution approved by voters in 2008. On October 17, Judge John W. Sedwick ruled in two lawsuits that Arizona's ban on same-sex marriage was unconstitutional, and enjoined the state from enforcing its ban, effective immediately. Attorney General Tom Horne said the state would not appeal that ruling, and instructed county clerks to comply and issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. [1]

Contents

Several Arizona cities and towns continue to provide civil unions or domestic partnerships to same-sex couples, offering a subset of the rights and benefits of marriage. Bisbee was the first city to establish civil unions for same-sex couples on June 4, 2013, followed by Tucson later that same month.

Restrictions

Statute

In 1975, the Arizona State Legislature passed an emergency bill defining marriage as "a union between a man and a woman" after the Arizona Supreme Court invalidated a marriage license issued to two men by a county clerk in Phoenix. [2]

In 1996, Arizona state legislators passed a ban on same-sex marriage and the recognition of same-sex marriages performed outside of the state. Governor Fife Symington, whose victory in the 1994 election was based in part on campaigning against his opponent's, Eddie Basha Jr., support for same-sex marriage, [3] signed the bill into law. [4]

Arizona statutes still contain a same-sex marriage ban, as well as a ban on recognizing same-sex marriage that are contracted outside of Arizona. [5] [6] The statutory ban is unenforceable due to Obergefell v. Hodges , and the ban on recognition of same-sex marriage contracted outside of Arizona is unenforceable due to the passage of the Respect for Marriage Act in 2022.

Constitution

Arizona voters have twice considered amendments to the Constitution of Arizona that would deny marriage rights to same-sex couples. On November 7, 2006, voters defeated Proposition 107, a state-initiated constitutional amendment that would have banned same-sex marriage and any legal status similar to marriage, by a margin of 48.2% to 51.8%, [7] departing from the national trend that saw seven other states approve similar constitutional amendments the same day. [8]

On May 12, 2008, the Arizona House of Representatives voted 33 to 25 in favor of Proposition 102, a constitutional amendment which defined marriage in Arizona as "the union of one man and one woman". The Arizona Senate passed the amendment 14–11 on June 25, 2008. On November 4, 2008, Arizona voters passed Proposition 102 by a vote of 56.2% in favor to 43.8% against. [9] [10] Unlike the failed Proposition 107, Proposition 102 did not ban civil unions.

On June 17, 2013, Equal Marriage Arizona filed an initiative to place on the November 2014 ballot an amendment that would substitute a gender-neutral definition of marriage in place of the one added to the State Constitution in 2008. It needed to gather 259,213 valid signatures by July 3, 2014, to have the initiative appear on that November's ballot. [11] [12] The group suspended its efforts in September 2013, announcing that "The various LGBT advocacy groups in the state and nationally announced they weren't going to throw their support behind the initiative. Without their help, we aren't able to do it." Other groups contended that 2016, a presidential election year, would have proven a better opportunity, but no initiative was placed on the ballot that year. [13]

Lawsuits

Federal cases

On January 6, 2014, in Connolly v. Roche, originally Connolly v. Brewer and later Connolly v. Jeanes, four same-sex couples filed a class-action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona seeking to have Arizona's definition of marriage ruled unconstitutional. Two of the plaintiff couples had married in California and two had adopted children through Arizona's public foster-care system. The amended complaint named as defendants three county court clerks acting in their official capacities and added two couples from the Flagstaff area and one couple from the Tucson area for a total of seven couples. [14] On March 13, Lambda Legal filed a lawsuit, Majors v. Horne, in the same court on behalf of seven same-sex couples and a widow and a widower, each the surviving spouse of a same-sex couple. Several of the couples were the parents of minor children and most had married in other states, including California, Iowa, Minnesota, New Mexico, New York, and Washington. [15] On September 12, U.S. District Judge John W. Sedgwick ordered that the state record a death certificate for plaintiff George Martinez as the husband of Fred McQuire. [16]

On October 17, 2014, U.S. District Judge John W. Sedwick, ruling in both cases, declared Arizona's ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional and enjoined the state from enforcing its ban, effective immediately. The Arizona Attorney General, Tom Horne, said the state would not appeal the ruling and instructed county clerks to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples: "Effective immediately, the clerks of Arizona county Superior Courts cannot deny a marriage license to any otherwise eligible licensees on the grounds that the license permits a marriage between persons of the same sex." While Horne disagreed with the court decision, he said "it would be unethical for me to file an appeal that would have no chance of success." Governor Jan Brewer also said she opposed the ruling, stating that it "thwarted the will of the people". [17] [18] Sedwick said he was bound by recent decisions of the Ninth Circuit in Sevcik v. Sandoval and Latta v. Otter : "The Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit recently ruled that substantially identical provisions of Nevada and Idaho law that prohibit same-sex marriages are invalid because they deny same-sex couples equal protection of the law, the right to which is guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States. This court is bound by decisions of the Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit." He also said that any appeal by state officials to the Ninth Circuit would be unsuccessful. The American Civil Liberties Union welcomed the court ruling, "Today's ruling brings security to thousands of families in Arizona. It's a moment to be celebrated. Equal protection of the law is one of the fundamental principles that allows our country to thrive and evolve." The state's Roman Catholic bishops said the decision "reflects a misunderstanding of the institution of marriage", and Cathi Herrod, president of the Center for Arizona Policy, said she was "heartbroken", "We mourn the loss of a culture and its ethical foundation. We mourn a culture that continues to turn its back on timeless principles." The editorial board of The Arizona Republic , responded, "We will soon find out if the institution of marriage can withstand the flood of loving couples who wish to formalize their relationship and avail themselves of all the legal protections heterosexual couples have long taken for granted. We expect it will do just fine. It hasn't suffered in any of the 30 other states where gays and lesbians now unite in matrimony. Oh, there will be those who lash out at judges who uphold constitutional principles over popular passions. There will be those who insist that 'God still ordains marriage to only be the union of one man and one woman,' as Center for Arizona Policy President Cathi Herrod did this morning in an email blast that promises to 'redouble our efforts to rebuild a culture of marriage.' They are free to do so. Churches can continue to decide who they will marry. That is their constitutional right. ..." [19]

The Maricopa County Clerk's Office quickly began issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples. The first couple to receive a license were Karen Bailey and Nelda Majors, plaintiffs in Majors and a couple for 56 years, on Friday, October 17 immediately after Attorney General Horne instructed county clerks to comply with the district court's rulings. [20] City judges in Phoenix performed several marriage ceremonies in Mayor Greg Stanton's conference room Friday afternoon, with Stanton passing out banana butter cream cake to the newlywed couples. [21]

On November 18, state officials announced they would appeal the rulings to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. The state solicitor, Robert Ellman, said the state hoped to avoid paying the original plaintiffs' attorneys' fees should the U.S. Supreme Court uphold bans on same-sex marriage. [22] On December 1, all parties asked the court to suspend proceedings pending action by the U.S. Supreme Court in a similar case from the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. [23] The Ninth Circuit agreed to that request the next day, suspending proceedings until March 25, 2015. [24] Both appeals were rejected in September and December 2015, respectively. The state was ordered to pay $200,000 in the Connolly case and $300,000 in the Majors case in attorneys' fees for the plaintiffs. [25] [26]

State cases

On April 13, 1994, the Pima County Superior Court ruled in Callender v. Corbett against a group of same-sex couples who had challenged the state's ban on same-sex marriages, citing that any change in marriage law was a matter for the Arizona Legislature to deal with. The plaintiffs filed an appeal, but later dropped it. [27] On July 7, 2003, Harold Donald Standhardt and Tod Alan Keltner sued the state in Standhardt v. State of Arizona in the Maricopa County Superior Court, alleging that the state's ban on same-sex marriages violated the due process clauses of the federal and state constitutions. The Arizona Court of Appeals ruled against the couple on October 8, 2003, and the Arizona Supreme Court declined to review the case on May 25, 2004. [27]

On August 13, 2014, the Arizona Court of Appeals ruled that the state's constitutional and statutory bans on same-sex marriage did not prevent the trial court from granting a divorce in a case, Beatie v. Beatie, in which one of the spouses was a transgender individual and had been married in a jurisdiction which had recognized their marriage as consisting of the union of one man and one woman. [28]

Developments after legalization

On June 26, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Obergefell v. Hodges that the Due Process and Equal Protection clauses of the U.S. Constitution guarantees same-sex couples the right to marry. The decision legalizing same-sex marriage nationwide in the United States. Following the overturning of Roe v. Wade in June 2022 by the U.S. Supreme Court, Governor Doug Ducey said he was "not interested" in revisiting the issue of same-sex marriage. [29]

Native American nations

Same-sex marriage is legal on the reservations of the Ak-Chin Indian Community, [30] the Colorado River Indian Tribes, [31] the Fort McDowell Yavapai Nation, [32] the Pascua Yaqui Tribe, [33] the Salt River Pima–Maricopa Indian Community, [34] the San Carlos Apache Tribe, [35] the White Mountain Apache Tribe, [30] and the Yavapai–Apache Nation. [36] It is explicitly prohibited in the Gila River Indian Community, which passed a motion banning same-sex marriages following the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges in June 2015, and the Navajo Nation, following the passage of the Diné Marriage Act in 2005. A bill to legalize same-sex marriage was introduced to the Navajo Nation Council by Delegate Eugene Tso of Chinle in July 2022. [37]

Two-spirit marriages

Marriages between two-spirit people and men or women have been historically performed among many of these tribes. Navajo culture has traditionally recognized two-spirit individuals who were born male but wore women's clothing and performed everyday household work and artistic handiwork which were regarded as belonging to the feminine sphere. They are known in the Navajo language as nádleehi (pronounced [nátɬèːhì] ). While the nádleehi had access to both masculine and feminine spheres of work, aside from hunting and warfare, they typically pursued feminine activities such as pottery making, weaving and tanning of hides, but also chanting, which was primarily a men's activity. Associated with prosperity and believed to have originated in the third world of the Holy People, the nádleehi directed the planting and the fieldwork, and generally functioned as head of a household. They were known for their skills in matchmaking and mediated between the sexes in matters of conflict and love. Traditionally, "real" nádleehi did not marry and had sexual intercourse exclusively with men, while "those who pretend to be nádleehi" could marry either men or women but if they married they would generally take on the clothing and activities of a man. [38] The nádleehi status thus created the possibility of a marriage between two biological males in Navajo culture. [39] Two-spirit people are known as ndéʼsdzan (pronounced [ntɛ́ʔstsàn] ) in the Western Apache language. [39]

The Cocopah have also traditionally recognized such two-spirit individuals, known in their language as elha (pronounced [eˈɬʲa] ). The elha "talked like women", "sought out female company" and refused to learn masculine tasks, and they married men without indication of polygyny. [40] The Mohave people refer to two-spirit individuals who crossed out of the masculine gender as ʼalyha (pronounced [ʔəlʲˈhaː] ). The ʼalyha married men and were regarded as "especially diligent wives", often sought out by shamans. They were spiritually important for the tribe as they were considered great healers, as were the hwame (pronounced [hʷaˈmeː] ), individuals who were born female but wore men's clothing and performed men's activities. The hwame married women, and could claim paternity of a child if they married a pregnant woman. Living together with an ʼalyha or a hwame followed the same patterns as did the establishment and dissolution of opposite-sex marriages. [39] [41] Similarly, the Maricopa people have traditionally recognized two-spirit people, known as ilyahai (pronounced [ilʲaˈxaj] ), who were born male but wore women's clothing and performed women's tasks, and married men. The Maricopa refer to female-bodied two-spirit individuals who performed men's activities as kwirahame (pronounced [ˌkʷiraxaˈme] ). Among the neighboring Quechan, two-spirit individuals who were born male but performed women's activities, such as grounding corn and fetching water, are known as elxa (pronounced [elˈxaː] ). They are said to have forged lasting marriages with men. [42] The two-spirit status thus allowed for marriages between two biological females or two biological males to be performed in these tribes. [39]

Among the Pima people, two-spirit individuals did not cross-dress but "act[ed], talk[ed], and express[ed] themselves like members of the opposite sex, showing an interest in duties and work of the other sex, and a marked preference for their companionship." [43] They are known in their language as ʼuvïkvaḍ (pronounced [ˈʔuvɨkvaɖ] , plural: ʼuʼuikvaḍ), [44] and it is likely they too were able to enter into marriages with men. The Southern Paiute tüwasawuts (pronounced [tɯˈwɑsɑwuts] ) could likewise marry men. The tüwasawuts had a "preference for feminine tasks as children" and carried out women's work in the community. Robert Lowie reported in 1924 that they "led the women in searching for grass seeds and that, like the women, [they] also roasted grass seeds". [39] The Hopi call them hova (pronounced [ˈhoβa] ). They had sexual intercourse exclusively with men, but traditionally remained unmarried. [45]

Demographics and marriage statistics

Data from the 2000 U.S. census showed that 12,332 same-sex couples were living in Arizona. By 2005, this had increased to 16,931 couples, likely attributed to same-sex couples' growing willingness to disclose their partnerships on government surveys. Same-sex couples lived in all counties of the state, and constituted 1.1% of coupled households and 0.6% of all households in the state. Most couples lived in Maricopa, Pima and Pinal counties, but the counties with the highest percentage of same-sex couples were La Paz (0.78% of all county households) and Apache (0.71%). Same-sex partners in Arizona were on average younger than opposite-sex partners, and significantly more likely to be employed. In addition, the average and median household incomes of same-sex couples were higher than different-sex couples, but same-sex couples were far less likely to own a home than opposite-sex partners. 18% of same-sex couples in Arizona were raising children under the age of 18, with an estimated 5,321 children living in households headed by same-sex couples in 2005. [46]

Domestic partnerships and civil unions

There have been several proposals to promote a voter initiative legalizing civil unions by groups of private citizens, including one gay rights activist from the United Kingdom. [47] [48] Opinion polls have indicated that a measure creating civil unions statewide would have a high likelihood of passage. In 2010, Equality Arizona, which opposes such a "separate-but-equal" status, announced it was considering other ways to respond to the passage of Proposition 102 in 2008. [47]

State employee benefits

Arizona began providing benefits to same-sex partners of state employees in 2008. [49] A 2009 statute made domestic partners of state employees ineligible for health care benefits, but a group of state employees in same-sex relationships succeeded in having a federal district court judge issue an injunction preventing the law from taking effect. The statute and that injunction were the subject of a lawsuit, Diaz v. Brewer . [50] The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the injunction on September 6, 2011, and denied the defendants' request for an en banc review on April 3, 2012. The U.S. Supreme Court denied certiorari on June 27, 2013. The Ninth Circuit certified the lawsuit as a class action in December 2013, allowing the injunction to cover all similarly situated couples.

Local unions and partnerships

On June 4, 2013, the city council of Bisbee approved an ordinance legalizing civil unions for same-sex couples; it took effect 30 days later. [51] A similar ordinance was approved in Tucson unanimously on June 19, 2013. [52] On July 5, the first same-sex civil union was established in Bisbee. [53] The councils of several towns and cities followed Bisbee and Tucson in adopting a civil union ordinance: Jerome on July 30, 2013, [54] Sedona on September 24, 2013, [55] Clarkdale on November 12, 2013, [56] and Cottonwood on December 17, 2013. [57] A proposal for such an ordinance failed in Camp Verde in February 2014. [58]

The cities of Flagstaff, [59] Phoenix, [60] Scottsdale, [60] Tempe, [60] and Tucson, [60] along with Pima County, [60] offer domestic partnership benefits to same-sex couples. The city of Mesa recognizes the domestic partners of city employees for various benefits provided that they "have executed a domestic partner affidavit satisfactory to [the city]." [61]

Public opinion

Public opinion for same-sex marriage in Arizona
Poll sourceDates administeredSample sizeMargin of errorSupportOppositionDon't know / refused
Public Religion Research Institute March 9 – December 7, 2023 490 adults± 0.82% 169%27%4%
Public Religion Research Institute March 11–December 14, 2022  ? ?70%26%4%
Public Religion Research Institute March 8–November 9, 2021  ? ?69%31%<0.5%
Public Religion Research Institute January 7–December 20, 2020 1,126 random telephone
interviewees		 ?61%32%7%
Public Religion Research Institute April 5–December 23, 2017 1,444 random telephone
interviewees		 ?63%28%9%
Public Religion Research Institute May 18, 2016–January 10, 2017 2,042 random telephone
interviewees		 ?62%28%10%
Public Religion Research Institute April 29, 2015–January 7, 2016 1,560 random telephone
interviewees		 ?56%36%8%
Public Religion Research Institute April 2, 2014–January 4, 2015 952 random telephone
interviewees		 ?58%33%9%
New York Times/CBS News/YouGov September 20–October 1, 20142,808 likely voters± 2.6%47%40%13%
Public Policy Polling February 28–March 2, 2014870 voters± 3.3%49%41%10%
Rocky Mountain Poll Archived 2014-05-02 at the Wayback Machine April 3–16, 2013700 households± 3.8%55%35%10%
Public Policy Polling November 17–20, 2011500 voters± 4.4%44%45%12%
Northern Arizona University February–March, 2004410 residents ? ?60% ?
Northern Arizona University October 3–20, 2003610 random residents± 4%42%54%4%

Notes:

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Same-sex marriage in the United States</span>

The availability of legally recognized same-sex marriage in the United States expanded from one state (Massachusetts) in 2004 to all fifty states in 2015 through various court rulings, state legislation, and direct popular votes. States each have separate marriage laws, which must adhere to rulings by the Supreme Court of the United States that recognize marriage as a fundamental right guaranteed by both the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, as first established in the 1967 landmark civil rights case of Loving v. Virginia.

Same-sex marriage has been legally recognized in Oregon since May 19, 2014, when Judge Michael J. McShane of the U.S. District Court for the District Court of Oregon ruled in Geiger v. Kitzhaber that Oregon's 2004 state constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriages discriminated on the basis of sexual orientation in violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution. A campaign that was then under way to win voter approval of a constitutional amendment legalizing same-sex marriage was suspended following the decision. In July 2015, Governor Kate Brown signed legislation codifying same-sex marriage in various Oregon statutes. The law change went into effect on January 1, 2016.

Same-sex marriage has been legal in Florida since January 6, 2015, as a result of a ruling in Brenner v. Scott from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida. The court ruled the state's same-sex marriage ban unconstitutional on August 21, 2014. The order was stayed temporarily. State attempts at extending the stay failed, with the U.S. Supreme Court denying further extension on December 19, 2014. In addition, a state court ruling in Pareto v. Ruvin allowed same-sex couples to obtain marriage licenses in Miami-Dade County on the afternoon of January 5, 2015. In another state case challenging the state's denial of marriage rights to same-sex couples, a Monroe County court in Huntsman v. Heavilin stayed enforcement of its decision pending appeal and the stay expired on January 6, 2015.

Same-sex marriage became legally recognized statewide in New Mexico through a ruling of the New Mexico Supreme Court on December 19, 2013, requiring county clerks to issue marriage licenses to all qualified couples regardless of gender. Until then, same-sex couples could only obtain marriage licenses in certain counties of the state. Eight of the 33 counties, covering 58% of the state's population, had begun issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples in August and September 2013. New Mexico's marriage statute was not specific as to gender, and it was the only state lacking a state statute or constitutional provision explicitly addressing same-sex marriage. Lacking a state law or judicial ruling concerning same-sex marriage prior to December 19, 2013, policy for the issuance of marriage licenses to same-sex couples was determined at the county level at the discretion of local issuing authorities i.e., some counties recognized same-sex marriage and issued marriage licenses to same-sex couples, while others did not.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Tom Horne</span> Canadian-American attorney & politician

Thomas Charles Horne is an American politician, attorney, businessman, and activist who has served as the Arizona Superintendent of Public Instruction since 2023 and previously from 2003 to 2011. A member of the Republican Party, he was Attorney General of Arizona from 2011 to 2015. Horne ran for reelection as Attorney General but lost to Mark Brnovich in the 2014 Republican primary.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Arizona</span> U.S. state

Arizona is a landlocked state in the Southwestern region of the United States. Arizona is part of the Four Corners region with Utah to the north, Colorado to the northeast, and New Mexico to the east; its other neighboring states are Nevada to the northwest, California to the west and the Mexican states of Sonora and Baja California to the south and southwest. It is the 6th-largest and the 14th-most-populous of the 50 states. Its capital and largest city is Phoenix.

Same-sex marriage has been legal in Utah since October 6, 2014. On December 20, 2013, the state began issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples as a result of the U.S. District Court for the District of Utah's ruling in the case of Kitchen v. Herbert, which found that barring same-sex couples from marrying violates the U.S. Constitution. The issuance of those licenses was halted during the period of January 6, 2014 until October 6, 2014, following the resolution of a lawsuit challenging the state's ban on same-sex marriage. On that day, following the U.S. Supreme Court's refusal to hear an appeal in a case that found Utah's ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals ordered the state to recognize same-sex marriage.

Same-sex marriage has been legally recognized in Nevada since October 9, 2014, when a federal district court judge issued an injunction against Nevada's enforcement of its same-sex marriage ban, acting on order from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. A unanimous three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit had ruled two days earlier that the state's ban on same-sex marriage was unconstitutional. Same-sex marriage was previously banned by an amendment to the Constitution of Nevada adopted in 2002. The statutory and constitutional bans were repealed in 2017 and 2020, respectively.

Same-sex marriage has been recognized in Montana since a federal district court ruled the state's ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional on November 19, 2014. Montana had previously denied marriage rights to same-sex couples by statute since 1997 and in its State Constitution since 2004. The state appealed the ruling to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, but before that court could hear the case, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down all same-sex marriage bans in the country in Obergefell v. Hodges, mooting any remaining appeals.

The Supreme Court decision in Obergefell v. Hodges that legalized same-sex marriage in the states and most territories did not legalize same-sex marriage on Indian reservations. In the United States, Congress has legal authority over tribal reservations. Thus, unless Congress passes a law regarding same-sex marriage that is applicable to tribal governments, federally recognized American Indian tribes have the legal right to form their own marriage laws. As such, the individual laws of the various United States federally recognized Native American tribes may set limits on same-sex marriage under their jurisdictions. At least ten reservations specifically prohibit same-sex marriage and do not recognize same-sex marriages performed in other jurisdictions; these reservations remain the only parts of the United States to enforce explicit bans on same-sex couples marrying.

Same-sex marriage has been legally recognized in Indiana since October 6, 2014. The state had previously restricted marriage to different-sex couples by statute in 1986. By legislation passed in 1997, it denied recognition to same-sex relationships established in other jurisdictions. A lawsuit challenging the state's refusal to grant marriage licenses to same-sex couples, Baskin v. Bogan, won a favorable ruling from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana on June 25, 2014. Until the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals granted an emergency stay of the district court's ruling on June 27, most Indiana counties issued marriage licenses to same-sex couples. The Seventh Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling in Baskin on September 4. A ruling in Bowling v. Pence stated that the state must recognize same-sex marriages performed out-of-state and the decision was stayed until the Seventh Circuit ruled on the merits in similar cases. It also stated that the ruling would remain stayed if the circuit court stayed its decision in the related cases.

Same-sex marriage has been legally recognized in Alaska since October 12, 2014, with an interruption from October 15 to 17 while state officials sought without success to delay the implementation of a federal court ruling. The U.S. District Court for the District of Alaska held on October 12 in the case of Hamby v. Parnell that Alaska's statutory and constitutional bans on same-sex marriage violated the Due Process and Equal Protection clauses of the U.S. Constitution. On October 15, state officials obtained a two-day stay from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which the U.S. Supreme Court refused to extend on October 17. Although Alaska is one of a few states which enforces a three-day waiting period between requesting a marriage license and conducting a marriage ceremony, at least one same-sex couple had the waiting period waived immediately after the district court's ruling. They married in Utqiagvik on October 13 and were the first same-sex couple to marry in Alaska.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">LGBT rights in Arizona</span>

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people in the U.S. state of Arizona may face legal challenges not experienced by non-LGBT residents. Same-sex sexual activity is legal in Arizona, and same-sex couples are able to marry and adopt. Nevertheless, the state provides only limited protections against discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. Several cities, including Phoenix and Tucson, have enacted ordinances to protect LGBT people from unfair discrimination in employment, housing and public accommodations.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">LGBT rights in New Mexico</span>

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people in the U.S. state of New Mexico enjoy the same rights as non-LGBT people. New Mexico has seen prominent advances in gay and lesbian rights in recent decades. Same-sex sexual activity has been legal since 1975. Same-sex marriage is legal statewide in New Mexico, as is adoption and access to fertility treatments for lesbian couples. Same-sex couples now enjoy the same rights as heterosexual married couples. Discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity is banned statewide in the areas of employment, housing and public accommodations. Additionally, conversion therapy on minors is prohibited in the state.

This article contains a timeline of significant events regarding same-sex marriage in the United States. On June 26, 2015, the landmark US Supreme Court decision in Obergefell v. Hodges effectively ended restrictions on same-sex marriage in the United States.

Same-sex marriage has been legal in Nebraska since June 26, 2015, when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in the case of Obergefell v. Hodges that the denial of marriage rights to same-sex couples violates the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Following the court ruling, Attorney General Doug Peterson announced that the state of Nebraska would comply and recognize same-sex marriages.

Same-sex marriage has been legal in Oklahoma since October 6, 2014, following the resolution of a lawsuit challenging the state's ban on same-sex marriage. On that day, following the U.S. Supreme Court's refusal to review Bishop v. Smith, a case that had found the ban unconstitutional, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals ordered Oklahoma to recognize same-sex marriages. On January 14, 2014, Judge Terence C. Kern of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma declared the state's statutory and constitutional same-sex marriage bans unconstitutional. The case, Bishop v. Smith, was stayed pending appeal. On July 18, 2014, a panel of the Tenth Circuit upheld Kern's ruling overturning Oklahoma's same-sex marriage ban. However, the panel put its ruling on hold pending disposition of a petition for certiorari by the U.S. Supreme Court. On October 6, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected the request for review, leaving the Tenth Circuit Court's ruling in place. State officials responded by implementing the Tenth Circuit's ruling, recognizing same-sex marriage in the state.

Same-sex marriage has been legal in Texas since the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges on June 26, 2015. Previously, the U.S. state of Texas had banned same-sex marriage both by statute since 1973 and in its State Constitution since 2005. On February 26, 2014, Judge Orlando Luis Garcia of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas found that Texas's ban on same-sex marriages was unconstitutional. On April 22, 2014, a state court came to the same conclusion. Both cases were appealed. The district court's decision was appealed to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, but before that court could issue a ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down all same-sex marriage bans in the United States in Obergefell on June 26, 2015. Within a few months of the court ruling, all counties had started issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples, except for Irion County, which announced in 2020 that it would begin issuing licenses to same-sex couples, making it the last county in the United States to comply with the ruling.

Same-sex marriage has been legal in Virginia since October 6, 2014, following the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court not to hear an appeal of the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals' ruling in Bostic v. Schaefer. Same-sex marriages subsequently began at 1:00 p.m. on October 6 after the Fourth Circuit issued its mandate, and since then Virginia has performed legal marriages of same-sex couples and recognized out-of-state same-sex marriages. Previously, the state had passed a statute prohibiting same-sex marriage in 1975, and further restrictions were added in 1997 and 2004, which made "void and unenforceable" any arrangements between same-sex couples bestowing the "privileges or obligations of marriage". Voters approved an amendment to the Constitution of Virginia reinforcing the existing laws in 2006. On January 14, 2014, a U.S. district court judge ruled in Bostic that Virginia's statutory and constitutional ban on the state recognition of same-sex marriages were unconstitutional, a decision upheld by the Fourth Circuit on July 28, 2014.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">LGBT rights in the Navajo Nation</span>

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people in the Navajo Nation, the largest indigenous sovereign state in the United States, face legal challenges not experienced by non-LGBT residents. Same-sex sexual activity is legal, but same-sex unions are not recognized, and marriage has been banned by the tribal constitution since 2005. In 2022, a bill was introduced to repeal the ban and recognize same-sex marriage, but has faced challenges on the reservation.

References

  1. ↑ "Ariz. gay marriage ban struck down". Politico. Retrieved 2023-10-04.
  2. ↑ Halsall, P. "Lesbian and Gay Marriage through History and Culture". Dr. Midge Wilson. DePaul University. Retrieved 16 December 2017.
  3. ↑ "The 1994 Elections: State by State". New York Times. November 10, 1994. Retrieved September 3, 2014.
  4. ↑ Raasch, Chuck (November 19, 2003). "Gay marriage debate likely to play role in '04 elections". Tucson Citizen. Retrieved September 1, 2014.
  5. ↑ "Void and prohibited marriages". Arizona State Legislature. Retrieved 28 August 2022.
  6. ↑ "Marriages contracted in another state; validity and effect". Arizona State Legislature. Retrieved 28 August 2022.
  7. ↑ Geis, Sonya (November 20, 2006). "New Tactic In Fighting Marriage Initiatives". Washington Post. Retrieved September 1, 2014.
  8. ↑ "Elections 2006". CNN.
  9. ↑ "States issue verdicts on gay rights, abortion". NBC News. November 5, 2008. Retrieved September 1, 2014.
  10. ↑ SCR1042
  11. ↑ "Initiative seeks to legalize gay marriage in Arizona". Arizona Daily Star. June 18, 2013. Retrieved September 1, 2014.
  12. ↑ Equal Marriage Arizona
  13. ↑ Rau, Alia Beard (September 10, 2013). "Same-sex marriage won't be on 2014 ballot". The Arizona Republic. Retrieved September 1, 2014.
  14. ↑ Rau, Alia Beard (January 6, 2014). "Suit filed to allow same-sex marriages in Arizona". AZ Central. Retrieved March 13, 2014.
  15. ↑ del Puerto, Luige (March 13, 2014). "Same-sex couples in Arizona file suit over state gay marriage ban". Reuters. Retrieved March 13, 2014.
  16. ↑ Richey, Warren (September 12, 2014). "US judge orders Arizona to list same-sex spouse on death certificate". Alaska Dispatch News. Christian Science Monitor. Archived from the original on September 15, 2014. Retrieved September 23, 2014.
  17. ↑ Westfall, Julie; Queally, James (October 17, 2014). "Arizona's gay marriage ban struck down, AG will not appeal". Los Angeles Times. Retrieved October 17, 2014.
  18. ↑ Pitzl, Mary Jo (October 18, 2014). "First gay marriages performed in Arizona". USA Today. Retrieved November 8, 2014.
  19. ↑ "2014-OCT: More reactions to legalizing same-sex marriage: Arizona". Religious Tolerance. Retrieved August 15, 2022.
  20. ↑ "Same-sex couples flock to wed as Arizona legalises gay marriage". The Guardian. October 18, 2014.
  21. ↑ "First gay marriages performed in Arizona". USA Today. October 18, 2014.
  22. ↑ Fischer, Howard (November 18, 2014). "State looks to cut cost of gay marriage court fight". Arizona Daily Star. Retrieved November 18, 2014.
  23. ↑ "Parties' Stipulated Motion to stay 9th Circuit appeal". Scribd.com. U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Retrieved December 1, 2014.
  24. ↑ "Order". Scribd.com. U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. December 2, 2014.
  25. ↑ Same-sex marriage didn't come cheap in Arizona azcentral, December 18, 2015
  26. ↑ Arizona to pay $200,000 to lawyers who won gay marriage case Arizona Capitol Times, September 30, 2015
  27. 1 2 "Legal Marriage Court Cases — A Timeline". www.buddybuddy.com. Retrieved August 7, 2022.
  28. ↑ The Honourable Douglas Gerlach, Judge (August 13, 2014). "In re the Matter of: Thomas T. Beatie, Petitioner/Appellant v. Nancy J. Beatie, Respondent/Appellee" (PDF). Arizona Court of Appeals: Division One. Retrieved November 8, 2014.
  29. ↑ Fischer, Howard (July 6, 2022). "Roe no reason to revisit gay marriage laws, Ducey says". Arizona Capitol Times.
  30. 1 2 Beard Rau, Alia (October 25, 2017). "Court orders Ak-Chin tribe to recognize marriages of same-sex couples". The Arizona Republic . Retrieved October 25, 2017.
  31. ↑ "Domestic Relations Code: Article 2: Marriage and Divorce" (PDF). www.crit-nsn.gov. Retrieved September 19, 2019.
  32. ↑ "The Fort McDowell Yavapai Nation Law and Order Code, Sec. 10-11" (PDF). www.fmyn.org. Retrieved July 30, 2022.
  33. ↑ "Pascua Yaqui Tribe Tribal Code, 5 PYTC § 2-10". www.pascuayaqui-nsn.gov. Retrieved July 30, 2022.
  34. ↑ "Salt River Pima–Maricopa Indian Community, Chapter 10" (PDF). www.srpmic-nsn.gov. Retrieved July 30, 2022.
  35. ↑ "Constitution and Bylaws of the San Carlos Apache Tribe of the San Carlos Reservation, Article V, Section 1(m)" (PDF). naair.arizona. Retrieved July 30, 2022.
  36. ↑ "Domestic Relations Code of the Yavapai-Apache Nation, Chapter 3.1" (PDF). Yavapai-Apache Nation. Retrieved August 8, 2022.
  37. ↑ "Navajo people advocate for bill to recognize same-sex marriage on Navajo Nation". AZ Mirror. July 15, 2022.
  38. ↑ Raphaelito, Josie (December 2019). "Indigenizing Love Through Diné Pride". Cultural Survival Quarterly Magazine.
  39. 1 2 3 4 5 Sabine Lang (1998). Men as women, women as men: changing gender in Native American cultures . University of Texas Press. ISBN   0-292-74701-2.
  40. ↑ Gifford, Edward W. (1933). "The Cocopah" (PDF). University of California Press. 31: 294.
  41. ↑ Devereux, G (1937). Institutionalized homosexuality of the Mohave Indians. Vol. 9. Human Biology.
  42. ↑ Forde, C. Daryll (December 12, 1931). "Ethnography of the Yuma Indians" (PDF). University of California Press. 28: 157.
  43. ↑ Will, W.W. (1938). "Note on the Pima Berdache" (PDF). American Anthropologist. 40.
  44. ↑ "Pima Dictionary: ʼuvïkvaḍ" (PDF). Retrieved August 15, 2022.
  45. ↑ Basaldu, Robert Christopher (1999). Hopi hova: Anthropological assumptions of gendered otherness in Native American societies (Thesis). The University of Arizona.
  46. ↑ "Census Snapshot" (PDF). Williams Institute. Retrieved August 30, 2022.
  47. 1 2 Shainker, Andrew J. (December 11, 2008). "Effort to get same-sex civil unions on Az ballot planned". Tucson Citizen. Retrieved September 4, 2014.
  48. ↑ "Rainbow Foot Soldiers Statement on Arizona Civil Partnerships Initiative". Press Release Point. March 8, 2009. Retrieved September 4, 2014.
  49. ↑ National Conference of State Legislatures: "States offering benefits for same-sex partners of state employees", accessed April 16, 2011
  50. ↑ MetroWeekly: Chris Geidner, "Ninth Circuit Keeps Arizona Law Ending Same-Sex Partner Health Benefits on Hold," September 6, 2011 Archived December 28, 2013, at the Wayback Machine , accessed July 8, 2012
  51. ↑ "Bisbee council approves civil unions proposal". azcentral.com. June 5, 2013.
  52. ↑ "Tucson becomes second Arizona city to allow same-sex civil unions". LGBTQ Nation. June 19, 2013.
  53. ↑ "Bisbee Bisbee OKs same-sex civil unions, but only 4 couples say 'I do'". Los Angeles Times. August 19, 2013.
  54. ↑ "Jerome approves civil unions". The Camp Verde Bugle. August 29, 2013. Archived from the original on September 27, 2013. Retrieved August 30, 2013.
  55. ↑ "Sedona approves local ordinance on civil unions". AZCentral. September 25, 2013.
  56. ↑ "Civil unions pass unanimously in Clarkdale". Verde Independent. November 13, 2013. Archived from the original on December 19, 2013. Retrieved November 14, 2013.
  57. ↑ "Cottonwood approves same-sex civil unions". KPHO. December 18, 2013. Archived from the original on December 19, 2013. Retrieved December 18, 2013.
  58. ↑ "Civil unions rejected by Camp Verde council". The Bulge. February 6, 2014.
  59. ↑ "City of Flagstaff Official Website - City Clerk". www.flagstaff.az.gov. Retrieved 2017-03-08.
  60. 1 2 3 4 5 Governments Offering Benefits
  61. ↑ "All Eligible Employees electing the 8/8/26 Plan". mesaaz.gov. 2017. Retrieved March 8, 2017.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.