|
|
Compiled by GayToday
Ruling from the bench in Stutzman v. Jones, Sacramento Superior Court Judge James T. Ford said that "Limit on Marriages" was a fair and accurate title for Proposition 22, slated for the March 2000 election. Judge Ford also granted the League's motion to intervene in the case, allowing the group to join the Attorney General in defending the title. League President and individual plaintiff Gail Dryden said, "This highly divisive measure is deceptive in its simplicity, making it all the more critical that voters see a title that reflects what the proposition is intended to do. This initiative would create discrimination unprecedented in California." Dryden added, "Judge Ford's ruling clears the way for the people of California to make informed decisions based on the most accurate, complete, and impartial information possible." Also known as the "Knight Initiative," Proposition 22's main sponsor is state Senator Pete Knight, who has led several failed attempts in the legislature to pass similar measures. In his decision today, Judge Ford rejected an attempt by Robert Stutzman, campaign manager for the initiative, to have it renamed. Stutzman sued Lockyer and the California Secretary of State after they rejected his proposal to call Proposition 22 by the circulation title, "Definition of Marriage." The League, a nonpartisan group dedicated to providing voter education was represented by Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund and the law firm of Heller Ehrman White & McAuliffe. The group believes the circulation title was deceptive, because the 14-word measure does not define marriage at all.
Jennifer C. Pizer, managing attorney of Lambda's Western Regional Office in Los Angeles, said, "The judge understood that this measure offers no definition, but in fact would create a new limit on marriages. The League has done Californians a great service by educating voters about this discriminatory initiative." Stutzman v. Jones, No. 99CS02549 |