In 2006, Arizona became the first state in the United States to reject a proposition, Prop 107, that would have banned same-sex marriage and civil unions. However, in 2008, Arizona voters approved of Prop 102, a constitutional amendment that prohibited same-sex marriage but not other unions. Prior to same-sex marriage being legal, the City of Bisbee became the first jurisdiction in Arizona to approve of civil unions. The state's Attorney General at the time, Tom Horne, threatened to sue, but rescinded the threat once Bisbee amended the ordinance; Bisbee approved of civil unions in 2013. The municipalities of Clarkdale, Cottonwood, Jerome, Sedona, and Tucson also passed civil unions.
Same-sex marriage and civil unions
Arizona
Arizona | Same-sex marriage and civil unions
Arizona became the first state in the United States to reject a proposition, Prop 107, that would have banned same-sex marriage and civil unions. October 17, 2014, each county's Clerk of the Superior Court began to issue same-sex marriage licenses, and Arizona became the 31st state to legalize same-sex marriage. In 2006, Arizona became the first state in the United States to reject a proposition, Prop 107, that would have banned same-sex marriage and civil unions. In 2006, Arizona became the first state in the United States to reject a proposition, Prop 107, that would have banned same-sex marriage and civil unions
are the oldest rocks in the world in the grand canyon
user
Yes, the rock layers exposed in the Grand Canyon and in the Grand Canyon National Park area range in age from about 200 million to nearly 2 billion years old.
assistant
is there any river flowing through or alongside it?
user
Yes, Colorado River
assistant
what exactly is that canyon mentioned above?
user
It is a steep-sided canyon carved by the Colorado River in Arizona, United States.
assistant
what are some of the tributaries of the water body mentioned above?
user
The Colorado is joined by over 25 significant tributaries: Green River,  Gila River ,
assistant
what are some of the flora found near this larger river?
user
Creosote bush, saguaro cactus, and Joshua trees
assistant
who were the first to explore this area?
user
The Spanish began to explore and colonize western North America.
assistant
has the state where the canyon is located, experienced any natural disasters?
user
The first damaging earthquake known to be centered within Arizona occurred on January 25, 1906, also including a series of other earthquakes centered near Socorro, New Mexico.
assistant
how many people live there?
user
The United States Census Bureau estimates Arizona's population was 7,278,717 on July 1, 2019, a 13.87% increase since the 2010 United States Census.
assistant
what is the state's policy on marriage between homosexual partners?
user
On October 17, 2014, Arizona Attorney General Tom Horne announced his office would no longer object to same-sex marriage, in response to a U.S. District Court Ruling on Arizona Proposition 102. On that day, each county's Clerk of the Superior Court began to issue same-sex marriage licenses, and Arizona became the 31st state to legalize same-sex marriage.
Arizona | Same-sex marriage and civil unions
CAP describes acceptance of homosexuality in society as "a deceitful and angry ideology" and supports what it describes as a "biblical value that God has a specific intent for sexuality and that it is only realized in the relationship between one man and one woman within the confines of marriage."
Center for Arizona Policy | Civil Union Ordinances
A November 2011 Public Policy Polling survey found 44% of Arizona voters supported the legalization of same-sex marriage, while 45% opposed it and 12% were not sure. A separate question on the same survey found 72% of respondents supported legal recognition of same-sex couples, with 40% supporting same-sex marriage, 32% supporting civil unions, 27% opposing all legal recognition and 1% not sure. Arizona Proposition 102, known by its supporters as the Marriage Protection Amendment, appeared as a legislatively referred constitutional amendment on the November 4, 2008 ballot in Arizona, where it was approved: 56.2%–43%. It amended the Arizona Constitution to define marriage as between one man and one woman.
Arizona | Same-sex marriage and civil unions
Same-sex marriage has been legally recognized in the U.S. state of Arizona since October 17, 2014. The 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. Two lawsuits in federal court that challenged the state's policies ended with a decision that the ban was unconstitutional and the state did not appeal that ruling. Before the court ruling, several Arizona cities and towns provided civil unions or domestic partnerships to same-sex couples.
Same-sex marriage in Arizona | Introduction
Arizona began providing benefits to same-sex partners of state employees in 2008. A 2009 statute made domestic partners of state employees ineligible for health benefits, but a group of state employees in same-sex relationships persuaded a federal District Court to issue an injunction preventing the law from taking effect. The statute and that injunction were the subject of a lawsuit, "Diaz v. Brewer". The Ninth Circuit affirmed the injunction and the Supreme Court rejected 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.
Same-sex marriage in Arizona | State employee benefits
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 same-sex marriage license granted to a couple. In 1996, the Arizona state legislators passed a ban on same-sex marriage and the recognition of same-sex marriages performed outside of the state. Republican Governor Fife Symington, whose victory in the 1994 election was based in part on campaigning against his opponent's support of same-sex marriage, signed the bill into law.
Same-sex marriage in Arizona | Statute
! style="width:190px;"| Poll source ! style="width:200px;"| Date(s)administered ! class=small | Samplesize ! error ! style="width:100px;"| % support ! style="width:100px;"| % opposition ! style="width:40px;"| % no opinion
Same-sex marriage in Arizona | Public opinion
Arizona voters have twice considered amendments to the State Constitution 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%, departing from the national trend that saw seven other states approve similar constitutional amendments the same day. On May 12, 2008, the Arizona House of Representatives voted 33 to 25 in favor of Proposition 102, a constitutional amendment which defines a valid marriage in Arizona as the union of one man and one woman.
Same-sex marriage in Arizona | Constitution
According to an editorial in the "Arizona Daily Star" on October 13, 2009, the Department of Administration in Arizona "stated that about 800 state employees are affected and that the cost to insure domestic partners is about $3 million of the $625 million the state spends on benefits". However, the state was giving those employees another year of coverage, due to legal necessity: "A legal review determined existing contracts with state employees will be honored."
Jan Brewer | Same-sex marriage and domestic partnership
Arizona has recognized same-sex marriage since being forced to end enforcement of its statutory and constitutional bans on same-sex marriage by the decision of a U.S. district court on October 17, 2014. In November 2006, Arizona voters rejected Proposition 106, which would have banned same-sex marriage and any legal status similar to marriage (such as civil unions or domestic partnerships). Two years later, however, Arizona voters approved the less restrictive Proposition 102 which amended the Constitution to ban the recognition of same-sex marriage. With no constitutional ban on domestic partnerships or civil unions, several cities, including Phoenix, Bisbee, Tucson, Flagstaff and more, subsequently enacted such measures.
LGBT rights in Arizona | Recognition of same-sex relationships
Hodges", which declared that same-sex marriage is a fundamental right in the United States.
Maricopa County, Arizona | Politics
Brewer supported Arizona Proposition 107, which would have defined marriage as between a man and a woman. This 2006 referendum, which would have prevented both same-sex marriage and civil unions in the state, did not pass – the first time U.S. voters rejected an attempt to ban same-sex marriage. However, in 2008, another proposition that banned same sex marriage (but not civil unions) passed. Brewer signed a law repealing legislation put into place by former governor Janet Napolitano, which had granted domestic partners of state employees the ability to be considered as "dependents", similar to the way married spouses are handled.
Jan Brewer | Same-sex marriage and domestic partnership
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. Polls have indicated that a measure creating the status civil union 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 Arizona Proposition 102.
Same-sex marriage in Arizona | Domestic partnerships and civil unions
In 2008, by administrative action, Gov. Janet Napolitano expanded the health benefits Arizona offered state employees by adding domestic partners to the category of qualified dependents. In November 2008, Arizona voters adopted an amendment to the state constitution that said: "Only a union of one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in this state." Governor Jan Brewer signed legislation on September 4, 2009, that redefined "dependents" as "spouses" and certain children. Its effective date was delayed until October 1, 2010, because of existing contracts with state employee unions.
Diaz v. Brewer | Background
Arizona Proposition 102 was an amendment to the constitution of the state of Arizona adopted by a ballot measure held in 2008. It added Article 30 of the Arizona Constitution, which says: "Only a union of one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in this state." The amendment added a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage to existing statutory bans in place since 1996. In October 2014, Article 30 of the Arizona Constitution was struck down as unconstitutional in the United States District Court for the District of Arizona, and is no longer enforced by the state of Arizona, which now allows and recognizes same-sex marriages.
2008 Arizona Proposition 102 | Introduction
Texts: 1. Marriage "Section 1. Only a union of one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in this state." § 25-101 Void and prohibited marriages "... C. A marriage between persons of the same sex is void and prohibited."
Same-sex marriage law in the United States by state | Arizona
In 2006, Arizona became the first state in the United States to reject a proposition, Prop 107, that would have banned same-sex marriage and civil unions. However, in 2008, Arizona voters approved of Prop 102, a constitutional amendment that prohibited same-sex marriage but not other unions. Prior to same-sex marriage being legal, the City of Bisbee became the first jurisdiction in Arizona to approve of civil unions. The state's Attorney General at the time, Tom Horne, threatened to sue, but rescinded the threat once Bisbee amended the ordinance; Bisbee approved of civil unions in 2013. The municipalities of Clarkdale, Cottonwood, Jerome, Sedona, and Tucson also passed civil unions.
Arizona | Same-sex marriage and civil unions
Public attitudes and opinions toward the LGBT community have evolved significantly in the past decades. A 2003 poll commissioned by the Northern Arizona University found that 54% of Arizonans opposed same-sex marriage, while 42% were in support. Subsequent polls recorded similar numbers. In 2013, a poll by Rocky Mountain Poll showed a 55% majority in favor of same-sex marriage, and opposition at 35%. Support then fell slightly to below 50% after the legalization of same-sex marriage in 2014, but then increased again, reaching 62% in 2016. A 2017 Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI) poll found that 63% of Arizona residents supported same-sex marriage, while 28% opposed it and 9% were unsure.
LGBT rights in Arizona | Public opinion
Arizona Proposition 107 was a proposed same-sex marriage ban, put before voters by ballot initiative in the 2006 General Election. If passed, it would have prohibited the state of Arizona from recognizing same-sex marriages or civil unions. The state already had a statute defining marriage as the union of a man and a woman and prohibiting the recognition of same-sex marriages performed elsewhere. This proposed amendment to the Arizona Constitution failed, with 48.2% voting in favor and 51.8% opposed, making Arizona the first U.S. state to defeat a state constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage. Several states approved similar measures between 1998 and 2006.
2006 Arizona Proposition 107 | Introduction
Governor Janet Napolitano issued an executive order in 2003 prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation against state employees. Discrimination in public and private employment, housing and public accommodations on the basis of both sexual orientation and gender identity is prohibited in Phoenix, Sedona, Tempe, Tucson, and Winslow. Flagstaff has protections for employment and public accommodations, but not housing. Other cities including Chandler, Gilbert, Glendale, Mesa, and Scottsdale prohibit discrimination on account of sexual orientation and gender identity against city employees. Peoria prohibits discrimination against city employees but on the basis of sexual orientation only. In February 2014, Governor Jan Brewer vetoed a "religious freedom" bill which would have granted any individual or legal entity an exemption from any state law if it substantially burdened their exercise of religion, widely reported as targeting LGBT people.
LGBT rights in Arizona | Discrimination protections
Without their help, we aren't able to do it." Other groups contended that 2016, a presidential election year, would prove a better opportunity.
Same-sex marriage in Arizona | Constitution
The cities of Flagstaff, Phoenix, Scottsdale, Tempe, and Tucson, along with Pima County, offer domestic partnerships. The city of Mesa recognizes domestic partners of city employees provided that they "have executed a domestic partner affidavit satisfactory to [the city]."
Same-sex marriage in Arizona | Local domestic partnerships
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 district court seeking to have Arizona's definition of marriage ruled unconstitutional. Two of the plaintiff couples were married in California and two have 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.
Same-sex marriage in Arizona | "Connolly v. Roche"
On June 25, 2008, the Arizona State Senate, by a vote of 14 to 11 in favor, passed the amendment. On November 4, 2008, Arizona voters passed Proposition 102 by a vote of 56.2% in favor to 43.8% against. On June 17, 2013, Equal Marriage Arizona filed an initiative to present voters with 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. 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.
Same-sex marriage in Arizona | Constitution
Gardner opposes same-sex marriage. In response to the October 2015 U.S. Supreme Court decision enshrining a constitutional right to marriage, Gardner reaffirmed his position that marriage should only be between a man and a woman, but conceded "this issue is in the hands of the courts and we must honor their legal decisions." In 2007, then a state representative, Gardner voted against legislation to allow Colorado gay and lesbian couples to adopt children. In 2012, Gardner voted to renew the Violence Against Women Act of 1994 (VAWA), which reauthorized the bill and expanded protections for Native Americans, immigrants, and gays and lesbians.
Cory Gardner | LGBTQ policy
On November 18, Arizona announced it would appeal the district court 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. On December 1, all parties asked the court to suspend proceedings pending action by the U.S. Supreme Court in similar cases from the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. The Ninth Circuit agreed to that request the next day, suspending proceedings until March 25, 2015. Both appeals were rejected in September and December 2015, respectively.
Same-sex marriage in Arizona | Appeal
An initiative to allow same-sex couples to marry was delivered to the state's Congress by former Labor Party candidate for governor, Miguel Angel Haro Moren, in January 2010. The proposal was rejected in February 2010 and the state filed a constitutional challenge against imposing laws of the Civil Code of the Federal District, concerning same-sex marriage, upon Sonora. In September 2017, all political parties in the state agreed to begin analyzing a proposed same-sex marriage bill. The bill's main sponsor said he was hopeful it would be accepted.
Same-sex marriage in Sonora | Legislative action
O Centro Espirita Beneficente Uniao do Vegetal" in 2006. Arizona lawmakers were concerned about a 2013 New Mexico Supreme Court ruling that weakened its state's RFRA, which was passed as a religious exemption to its own public accommodation law prohibiting the denial of services based on a person's sexual orientation or gender identity. Twenty-one states, not including Arizona, have similar public accommodation laws protecting sexual orientation. The New Mexico Supreme Court ruled in "Elane Photography v. Willock" that the state's RFRA could not be invoked between two parties if the government was not a party to the legal proceedings. The bill was introduced by Senator Steve Yarbrough to amend a law currently giving religious assemblies or institutions a religious exemption from any law.
Arizona SB 1062 | Background
Chapter 10 of the Law and Order Code of the Fort McDowell Yavapai Community of Arizona states that all marriages since April 19, 1954, "shall be in accordance with state laws." On October 17, 2014, U.S. District Court Judge John Sedwick ruled that Arizona's same-sex marriage ban was unconstitutional.
Same-sex marriage in tribal nations in the United States | Fort McDowell Yavapai Nation
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.
Same-sex marriage in Arizona | Appeal
, 29 states had constitutional provisions restricting marriage to one man and one woman, while 12 others had statutes that did so. Nineteen states banned any legal recognition of same-sex unions that would be equivalent to civil marriage. Voters had approved 28 out of 30 popular referenda in which states asked voters to adopt a constitutional amendment or initiative defining marriage as the union of a man and a woman. Arizonans voted down one such amendment in 2006, but approved a different amendment to that effect in 2008.
History of same-sex marriage in the United States | 2010
On August 13, 2014, Division One of the Arizona Court of Appeals ruled that Arizona's constitutional and statutory bans on same-sex marriage did not prevent the trial court from granting a divorce in a case 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.
Same-sex marriage in Arizona | "Beatie v. Beatie"
The Domestic Relations Code of the Yavapai-Apache Nation of Arizona of 1994, states in Chapter 3.1. that "all marriages in the future shall be in accordance with the State laws." On October 17, 2014, U.S. District Court Judge John Sedwick ruled that Arizona's same-sex marriage ban was unconstitutional.
Same-sex marriage in tribal nations in the United States | Yavapai-Apache Nation
In October 2020, the Arizona Court of Appeals made an explicit ruling that same-sex couples must have "equality of parentage" for children of same-sex couple parents - regardless if married or not.
LGBT rights in Arizona | Arizona same-sex birth certificates
Statewide prohibition of discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation for state employees by executive order.
List of cities and counties in the United States offering an LGBT non-discrimination ordinance | Arizona
In April 2019, the Arizona State Legislature repealed a 1991 law that prohibited AIDS- and HIV-related instruction that "promotes a homosexual life-style", "portrays homosexuality as a positive alternative life-style", or "suggests that some methods of sex are safe methods of homosexual sex." Due to several pending court cases, the constitutionality of the law was questioned. The bill passed the House by a vote of 55-5, and the Senate by a 19-10 vote. The law went into effect on July 1, 2019. State Senator Sylvia Allen, a Republican, subsequently attempted to introduce a similar law. She proposed removing the word "homosexuality" from public school curricula and preventing any sex education before age 12.
LGBT rights in Arizona | No promo homo law
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 ordinances in place designed to protect LGBT people from unfair discrimination in employment, housing and public accommodations. Phoenix and Tucson are home to a large LGBT community. The first Phoenix Pride parade took place in 1981, and now attracts thousands of attendees every year.
LGBT rights in Arizona | Introduction
The same poll found that 73% of Arizonans supported an anti-discrimination law covering sexual orientation and gender identity, while 20% were opposed. Furthermore, 59% were against allowing public businesses to refuse to serve LGBT people due to religious beliefs, while 35% supported allowing such religiously-based refusals.
LGBT rights in Arizona | Public opinion
An Initiative Measure Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of Arizona; amending the Constitution of Arizona; by adding Article XXX; relating to the protection of marriage To preserve and protect marriage in this state, only a union between one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage by this state or its political subdivisions and no legal status for unmarried persons shall be created or recognized by this state or its political subdivisions that is similar to that of marriage.
2006 Arizona Proposition 107 | Official title and text
In 2013, the City of Bisbee announced that it intended to legalize same-sex civil unions within the municipality. The Arizona Attorney General, Tom Horne, initially opposed the ordinance, but withdrew a legal challenge after the city adopted an amended version of the ordinance that complied with state laws. The Center for Arizona Policy opposed the city's move to offer civil unions and responded with a challenge saying, "If the City of Bisbee enacts a law recognizing a quasi-marital relationship not provided for by Arizona law, it will likely find itself involved in expensive and time-consuming litigation, which it is likely to lose." Following Bisbee, the cities and towns of Clarkdale, Cottonwood, Jerome, Sedona, and Tucson also approved of civil unions.
Center for Arizona Policy | Civil Union Ordinances
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. 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.
Same-sex marriage in Arizona | District court ruling in both cases
In the United States, 13 states require discussion of sexual orientation in sex education. Of those 13 states, 9 require discussion of sexual orientation to be inclusive, while 4 states require only negative information be presented regarding LGBT-related sexual orientation. Arizona provides HIV education with the condition that if and when it is taught, HIV education curriculum cannot promote a "homosexual lifestyle," or "portray homosexuality in a positive manner." Similarly, Oklahoma HIV education teaches, "among other behaviors, that 'homosexual activity' is considered to be 'responsible for contact with the AIDS virus.'" On October 1, 2015, Governor of California Jerry Brown issued a statewide mandate for sexual health education.
Sex education in the United States | State policies
Worsley opposed to same-sex marriage and provided funds to the campaign to ban same-sex marriage in Arizona. He has received a 100% from the socially conservative Center for Arizona Policy, which opposes gay marriage and civil unions, and a 0% from Stonewall Democrats of Arizona, a partisan Democratic group which supports LGBT rights. He initially voted for a bill that would allow some business to refuse certain services to same-sex couples; however, Worsley then said he was uncomfortable with his vote, reversed his position, and petitioned then-Governor Jan Brewer to veto the bill which some considered discriminatory against gay and lesbian couples.
Bob Worsley | LGBT issues
As an amendment to the Constitution of Arizona, the definition cannot be changed by the state legislature, and the possibility that a state court might find a state constitutional guarantee of same-sex couples' right to marry is eliminated.
2008 Arizona Proposition 102 | Overview
On August 26, 2008, Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard and Secretary of State Jan Brewer agreed that the ballot description would state that same-sex marriage was already prohibited by statute. Incorporating the same provision into the Arizona Constitution was meant to prevent an Arizona court from ruling that the statute was invalid under the Arizona Constitution. Along with similar measures in California (California Proposition 8 (2008)) and Florida (Florida Amendment 2 (2008)), Proposition 102 was decided by voters in the general election on November 4, 2008. The amendment passed by a margin of 56% in favor and 44% against. Proposition 102 had no immediate impact because its definition of marriage was consistent with the existing statutory definition.
2008 Arizona Proposition 102 | Overview
In April 2019, the Arizona State Legislature passed (House vote 55–5 and Senate vote 19–10) and the Governor of Arizona signed a repeal of the 1991 HIV law (ARS § 15-716) that prohibited AIDS and HIV-related "instruction which: 1. Promotes a homosexual life-style. 2. Portrays homosexuality as a positive alternative life-style. 3. Suggests that some methods of sex are safe methods of homosexual sex." Due to several court cases running, the constitutionality of the law was questioned. The repeal went into effect on July 1, 2019.
No promo homo laws | Arizona
McSally opposes same-sex marriage and in 2018 said "philosophically, I believe marriage is between one man and one woman, and it should be left to the states." After the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in "Obergefell v. Hodges", which upheld a constitutional right to same-sex marriage, McSally said she would "respect the Supreme Court's decision" but expressed the view that "this debate belongs at the state level." She has declined to take a position on the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), which would bar employers with more than 15 employees from engaging in employment discrimination on the basis of an "actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity." During her 2010 campaign, McSally indicated on a Center for Arizona Policy questionnaire that she opposes such additions to anti-discrimination law.
Martha McSally | LGBTQ rights
As state law already allows businesses to refuse services to anyone for any given reason, business owners noted that refusing services to LGBT people was currently allowed anyway. They would only be losing business by discriminating and do not need extra protections for something they cannot be sued for. Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of the UC Irvine law school, argued that the bill was harmful and "sends a message that the state is bigoted." Supporters of the bill included two conservative groups, the Center for Arizona Policy and the Alliance Defending Freedom, both of whom worked on the bill. The Arizona Catholic Conference had called on its congregants to support the bill.
Arizona SB 1062 | Criticism
According to the Constitution and by-laws of the San Carlos Apache Tribe of Arizona, all marriages shall be in accordance with state laws. On October 17, 2014, Arizona's ban on same-sex marriage was declared unconstitutional.
Same-sex marriage in tribal nations in the United States | San Carlos Apache Tribe
In September 2017, the Arizona Supreme Court unanimously ruled that same-sex spouses have the same parental rights as opposite-sex spouses under state law. Basing their ruling on "Obergefell v. Hodges" and "Pavan v. Smith", the court concluded that married same-sex couples have the right to list both their names on their child(ren)'s birth certificate(s).
LGBT rights in Arizona | Adoption and parenting
The proposition was backed by the Protect Marriage Arizona coalition, which included the Center for Arizona Policy and United Families Arizona. The proposition was primarily opposed by the Arizona Together coalition, which included the Arizona Human Rights Fund and the Human Rights Campaign.
2006 Arizona Proposition 107 | Introduction
On March 13, Lambda Legal filed a suit 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 are the parents of minor children and most married in other states, including California, Iowa, Minnesota, New Mexico, New York, and Washington. The case was "Majors v. Horne". On September 12, U.S. District Judge John Sedgwick ordered that the state record a death certificate for plaintiff George Martinez as the husband of Fred McQuire.
Same-sex marriage in Arizona | "Majors v. Horne"
He argued that because the Congress of Sonora had not yet changed the law, an amparo was still necessary. Following Bojórquez Castillo's decision, members of Congress from across the political spectrum announced their support for amending the Family Code to define marriage as being between two people, including deputies from the National Action Party, the Institutional Revolutionary Party and the Party of the Democratic Revolution.
Same-sex marriage in Sonora | Decision of the Director of the Civil Registry
Same-sex marriages and domestic partnerships (limited to state employees only) are both granted throughout the state to same-sex couples.
Cities and counties in the United States offering a domestic partnership registry | Arizona
Since 1964, Democrats have only kept the margin within single digits three times–in 1992, 1996, and 2016. The county is considered a bellwether polity. Despite its apparent political leanings, Maricopa County voted against Proposition 107 in the 2006 election. This referendum, designed to ban gay marriage and restrict domestic partner benefits, was rejected by a 51.6–48.4% margin within the county, and statewide by a similar margin. Two years later, however, a majority of county residents voted to pass the ultimately successful state constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage. The amendment was later overruled by the Supreme Court's 2015 ruling in "Obergefell v.
Maricopa County, Arizona | Politics
citizens and legal permanent residents may sponsor their spouses (and other immediate family members) for immigration purposes. But, same-sex partners committed to spending their lives together are not recognized as "families" under U.S. immigration law and thus do not have this same right." and how "This is unacceptable, and we believe comprehensive immigration reform legislation must include a strong family reunification component inclusive of LGBT families." After the Arizona State Legislature passed State Senate Bill 1070 and after Arizona Governor Jan Brewer signed it into law, Sánchez claimed that the law, and similar laws throughout the United States, were the product of white supremacists: "There's a concerted effort behind promoting these kinds of laws on a state-by-state basis by people who have ties to white supremacy groups.
Linda Sánchez | Civil rights
Arizona permits adoption by individuals. There are no explicit prohibitions on adoption by same-sex couples or on second-parent adoptions. However, state law requires adoption agencies to give primary consideration to adoptive placement with a married couple. Agencies may place a child with a legally single person if it is in the child's best interest or if there is not a married couple available. Lesbian couples have access to assisted reproduction services, such as in vitro fertilization. State law recognizes the non-genetic, non-gestational mother as a legal parent to a child born via donor insemination, but only if the parents are married.
LGBT rights in Arizona | Adoption and parenting
In December 2008, Obama called for repealing the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). On May 15, 2008, in a statement in response to the ruling of the California Supreme Court, Obama announced his opposition to Proposition 8, an initiative measure proposed for the 2008 California General Election ballot that would amend the California Constitution to define the word "marriage" as the union of a man and a woman. In a letter that he read to the Alice B. Toklas LGBT Democratic Club on June 29, 2008, Obama reiterated his opposition to the proposed amendment, stating that he supported the extension of "fully equal rights and benefits to same-sex couples under both state and federal law."
Social policy of the Barack Obama administration | Same-sex marriage
On 10 July 2015, a 7th district judge ordered the state to accommodate a lesbian couple's injunction. The ruling gave the Governor and the Congress President until 15 July 2015 to make the arrangements and revise the laws regarding marriage, or face penalties. The attorney leading the injunction told the media that state leaders would be found liable for not vetoing the discriminatory revision of the Family Code if it was not modified in accordance with the judge's order. It was announced on 13 July 2015 that Congress would abide by the judge's ruling. When questioned by the media on 14 July 2015, Governor Salvador Jara Guerrero declared that the changes would be applied on 15 July and was quoted as saying "Of course!" to removing the heterosexual definition of marriage in the state's code.
Same-sex marriage in Michoacán | Injunctions
Chapter 10 of the Tribal Code of Ordinances of the Salt River Pima–Maricopa Indian Community of the Salt River Reservation in Arizona provides that all marriages since April 19, 1954 "shall be in accordance with the state laws." U.S. District Court Judge John Sedwick ruled on October 17, 2014 that Arizona's same-sex marriage ban was unconstitutional.
Same-sex marriage in tribal nations in the United States | Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community
While proponents said the bill was intended to protect the right of business owners to refuse services based on religious objections and was a direct response to the New Mexico Supreme Court's ruling in "Elane Photography v. Willock" against a business that religiously objected to accommodating a same-sex wedding, critics, a few media outlets, and opponents argued that the intent was to allow businesses to refuse to serve the LGBT community, specifically in the cases of same-sex couples. Critics said that the bill would have allowed any business to discriminate against any group of people for any religious reason. Businesses, civil rights groups, and gay rights groups had opposed the bill.
Arizona SB 1062 | Criticism
Same-sex marriage is currently not legal in the Mexican state of Sonora. On 11 May 2016, the Director of the Civil Registry of Sonora announced that same-sex couples could begin marrying in the state without the need for an amparo (ie: court order). However, on 18 May 2016, the Governor ordered all civil registries in the state to stop marrying same-sex couples.
Same-sex marriage in Sonora | Introduction
Equality Arizona is a statewide political advocacy organization in Arizona that advocates for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) rights, including same-sex marriage.
Equality Arizona | Introduction
The Center for Arizona Policy, along with the Alliance Defending Freedom, helped write Arizona Senate Bill 1062, a controversial bill that, if signed into law, would have allowed business owners and employees to refuse to serve anyone based on sincerely held religious beliefs. Supporters of the bill claimed it was meant to protect the religious freedoms of Arizonans, while opponents pointed out that it was intended to allow discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people. Top aides for Arizona Governor Jan Brewer worked closely with CAP in crafting the language of the bill, but Brewer, in response to boycott threats and other economic pressure from various national groups, vetoed it on February 26, 2014, a few days after it passed the state Senate and House.
Center for Arizona Policy | SB 1062
Arizona SB 1062 was an Arizona bill to amend an existing law to give any individual or legal entity an exemption from any state law if it substantially burdened their exercise of religion, including Arizona law requiring public accommodation. It was one of several similar bills in U.S. state legislatures allowing individuals to refuse service based on religion, with some bills specifically protecting religious disapproval of same-sex marriage. It was widely reported as targeting LGBT people, although Arizona law provides no protection against discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. Critics noted that it would have broadly denied anyone service on religious grounds.
Arizona SB 1062 | Introduction
There were two lawsuits regarding the recognition of same-sex marriage in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona. Both were consolidated by U.S. District Judge John W. Sedwick, who ruled in favour of a right to same-sex marriage:
Same-sex marriage in Arizona | Federal court
On June 15, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in "Bostock v. Clayton County", consolidated with "Altitude Express, Inc. v. Zarda", and in "R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes Inc. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission" that discrimination in the workplace on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity is discrimination on the basis of sex, and Title VII therefore protects LGBT employees from discrimination.
LGBT rights in Arizona | "Bostock v. Clayton County"
The Center for Arizona Policy (CAP) is a nonprofit conservative lobbying group based in Arizona. The organization advocates for the passage of socially conservative policies in the state. It also produces voter guides to encourage its supporters to elect conservative lawmakers. Over 100 bills supported by CAP have been signed into law in Arizona. CAP employees co-wrote Arizona's controversial SB 1062, which would have shielded business owners and employees from lawsuits if they refused service to anyone based on what they described as sincerely held religious beliefs. In particular, the bill would have exempted such businesses if they refused to hire or service people because of the person's sexual orientation based on religious beliefs.
Center for Arizona Policy | Introduction
On April 20, 2005, Rell signed into law a bill that made Connecticut the first state to adopt civil unions for same-sex couples without being directed to do so by a court. The law gives same-sex couples all of the 300+ rights, responsibilities, and privileges that the state gives to heterosexual couples, including the right to adopt children, awarding state income tax credits, inheritance rights, and allowing same-sex partners to be considered next-of-kin when it comes to making medical decisions for incapacitated partners, yet does not require employers to give equal insurance benefits as they would to heterosexual couples. The bill was amended to define marriage as "between a man and a woman" after Rell threatened a veto.
Jodi Rell | LGBT policy
Pima County supported John Kerry 53% to 47% in the 2004 U.S. Presidential Election, and Barack Obama 54% to 46% in the 2008 U.S. Presidential Election. In the latter year, Pima was the only county to vote against Arizona's gay marriage ban. In 2013, Tucson became the second city in Arizona to approve of civil unions for same-sex partners. The city was the first in the state to pass a domestic partnership registry earlier in 2003. In general, Tucson and Pima County support the Democratic Party, as opposed the state's largest metropolitan area, Phoenix, which usually supports the Republican Party.
Tucson, Arizona | Politics and government
Arizona includes sexual orientation as a protected category covered under its hate crime law. The law provides additional legal penalties for the commission of a crime motivated by the victim's sexual orientation, amongst other categories. Gender identity is not included, though federal law covers crimes triggered by the victim's gender identity since the "Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act" was signed into law in October 2009.
LGBT rights in Arizona | Hate crime law
I'm Republican, a very conservative Republican... I'm not in favor of gay marriage." A month later, when asked by the Des Moines "Register" if gay couples should receive the same benefits as married couples, he said his "attitude on it has not been fully formed" but then responded simply "no." At the beginning of his 2016 presidential campaign, Trump continued to oppose same-sex marriage. In June 2015, when asked about the "Obergefell v. Hodges" ruling in which the Supreme Court guaranteed the right to same-sex marriage nationwide, he said he personally supported "traditional marriage". He added: "I would have preferred states, you know, making the decision...But they [the Supreme Court] made the decision...
Social policy of Donald Trump | Same-sex marriage
According to a profile in "The Advocate", "Sinema has her sights set on advancing LGBT rights." She has a history of policy advocacy regarding LGBT rights and issues. In 2006 Sinema was among the leading opponents of a proposed amendment to the Arizona state constitution which would have banned same-sex marriages and civil unions. The proposal failed in Arizona, the first time that a state rejected a ban on same-sex marriage, but, a second proposed amendment banning only same-sex marriage was passed in 2008 with Sinema opposing that amendment as well. She supports same-sex marriage, domestic partnership recognition, and adding gender identity to anti-discrimination laws.
Kyrsten Sinema | LGBT rights
As of August 27, 2008 three committees related to Proposition 102 were registered with the Secretary of State: YESforMarriage.com supporting Prop 102 was the one committee in support, and the two committees in opposition were No on Prop 102 and Arizona Together Opposed to Prop 102. Supporters said that Proposition 102 was necessary to prevent judges changing the legal definition of marriage, as was done in Massachusetts, California, Connecticut and Iowa. Opponents said that Proposition 102 was unnecessary because same-sex marriage was already illegal in Arizona, and that there were more pressing issues facing Arizona; also they cited the issue of the separation of church and state.
2008 Arizona Proposition 102 | Supporters and opponents
The legislation was scheduled to be heard by Arizona's Education Committee in January 2020, but the hearing was postponed so the proposal could be revised.
LGBT rights in Arizona | No promo homo law
In 2012 during Heiler's confirmation to the Arizona Board of Regents, Democrats were troubled by homophobic statements Heiler had made in the past. In an editorial for The State Press at ASU, Heiler wrote: It is my impression that by `coming out of the closet,' as their emergence has come to be called, homosexuals hope to make the rest of us less uncomfortable about their aberration-and despite one's feelings about it, it is most definitely an aberration. Supportive Republicans noted the comments were made many years ago and Heiler ought to be judged by his current position on gays. Heiler said that his position has changed and that all Arizonans "ought to live in harmony together."
Jay Heiler | Statements on Homosexuals
State Senators Jack W. Harper, Ronald Gould, Thayer Verschoor, and John Huppenthal stood out as the proponents of the Marriage Amendment to the Arizona State Constitution. The language of Prop 102 was adopted as a strike-everything amendment to Senator Gould's SCR1042. In 2006, a more restrictive measure, Proposition 107, had been defeated in the general election.
2008 Arizona Proposition 102 | Miscellaneous
Several hoax National Report stories have been mistakenly reported as fact by media outlets. One report stated that Arizona governor Jan Brewer intended to introduce mandatory gay-to-straight conversion courses into the state's public school system. A spokesman for the governor called the fake article "vile" and said, "its authors should be ashamed". Brewer has been a target of gay-rights activists because of her efforts to strip same-sex partners of government benefits, and for her stance on making adopting children harder for gay couples. One article, at the time of the closure of some US monuments, including the World War II memorial in Washington, DC, during a budget dispute, fooled researchers at Fox News Channel into reporting that the then President Obama had announced his intention to spend his own money to keep a Muslim museum open during a government shutdown.
National Report | Misinterpretations
The revision of American immigration law imposed a ban on homosexual people began in 1952. The language barred "aliens afflicted with psychopathic personality, epilepsy or mental defect." Congress explicitly intended this language to cover "homosexuals and sex perverts." The law was amended in 1965 to more specifically prohibit the entry of persons "afflicted with... sexual deviation." Until 1990, "sexual deviation" was grounds for exclusion from the United States, and anyone who admitted being a homosexual was refused entry. Lesbian and gay individuals are now admitted and US citizens may petition for immigrant visas for their same-sex spouses under the same terms as opposite-sex spouses.
Marriage in the United States | History
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. Despite the ruling by the New Mexico Supreme Court allowing same-sex marriages in the state, some of New Mexico's Native American tribes (most notably the Navajo Nation) continue to prohibit same-sex marriages within their jurisdictions and do not recognize same-sex marriages performed elsewhere. A small number of same-sex marriages were licensed in Sandoval County in 2004.
Same-sex marriage in New Mexico | Introduction
(Restatement (Second) of Conflict of Laws § 283(2) (1971).) States historically exercised this "public policy exception" by refusing to recognize out-of-state polygamous marriages, underage marriages, incestuous marriages, and interracial marriages. Following the "Windsor" decision in 2013, nearly all courts that have addressed the issue have held that states with laws defining marriage as a one-man, one-woman union cannot refuse to recognize same-sex marriages that were legally performed elsewhere and must permit all people, regardless of gender or sexual orientation, the right to marry. Same-sex marriage is currently legal in all US States. In 2003 and 2008 respectively, the Massachusetts and California supreme courts ruled in "Goodridge v.
Federal Marriage Amendment | Role of states
A July 2011 Public Policy Polling survey found that a plurality of voters in the state supported same-sex marriage. 45% of Nevada voters thought that same-sex marriage should be legal, while 44% thought it should be illegal and 11% were not sure. A separate question on the same survey found that 77% of Nevada voters supported the legal recognition of same-sex couples, with 39% supporting same-sex marriage, 38% supporting civil unions but not marriage, 22% favoring no legal recognition and 2% not sure. An August 2012 Public Policy Polling survey found that a plurality of voters in the state supported same-sex marriage.
LGBT rights in Nevada | Public opinion
! style="width:190px;"| Poll source ! style="width:200px;"| Date(s)administered ! class=small | Samplesize ! error ! style="width:100px;"| % support ! style="width:100px;"| % opposition ! style="width:40px;"| % no opinion
Same-sex marriage in Nevada | Public opinion
Reagan voted against banning abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy. She also broke with her party and voted with Democrats against allowing employers to refuse to provide birth control coverage to employees. On LGBT issues, she has a mixed record. She voted in favor of defining marriage as between one man and one woman, but she also voted against a bill that would have prevented same-sex couples from adopting. She was one of four Republicans in the state house to vote in favor of giving domestic partner rights to unmarried gay and straight couples. After same-sex marriage was legalized in Arizona, Reagan said that "[it] should be a proud day for Arizona as we celebrate equality." She was given a 100% rating by Equality Arizona which supports same-sex marriage and other LGBT rights.
Michele Reagan | Social positions
state to reject a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage. Arizona rejected a ban on same-sex marriages and civil unions in 2006 and then adopted a ban on only same-sex marriages in 2008. Minnesota's constitutional amendment proposal was rejected by 51.9% of voters.
Same-sex marriage in Minnesota | Efforts to amend the State Constitution
Title 9, Chapter 1 of the Tohono O'odham Nation (previously known as Papago Law and Order Code Chapter 3, "Domestic Relations") provides that duly licensed applicants over the age of 21, if male, and 18, if female (or with parental consent if a minor), can be married by authorized officiants. Prohibited marriages per section 7 are limited to those within listed degrees of consanguinity.
Same-sex marriage in tribal nations in the United States | Tohono O'odham Nation of Arizona
According to the White Mountain Apache Domestic Relations Code, enacted on September 9, 2015, Chapter 1, sections 1.3, 1.5 and 1.6, marriage is a solemnized civil procedure between consenting parties, of legal age or with parental consent, in conformity with state (Arizona) or tribal law, who are free from infectious and communicable diseases and are not prohibited by clan or specified consanguinity. In a 2017 ruling, an Ak-Chin court noted that the White Mountain Apache Tribe recognizes same-sex marriage.
Same-sex marriage in tribal nations in the United States | White Mountain Apache Tribe
Texts: "Paragraph I. Recognition of marriage. " "(a) This state shall recognize as marriage only the union of man and woman. Marriages between persons of the same sex are prohibited in this state." "(b) No union between persons of the same sex shall be recognized by this state as entitled to the benefits of marriage. This state shall not give effect to any public act, record, or judicial proceeding of any other state or jurisdiction respecting a relationship between persons of the same sex that is treated as a marriage under the laws of such other state or jurisdiction. The courts of this state shall have no jurisdiction to grant a divorce or separate maintenance with respect to any such relationship or otherwise to consider or rule on any of the parties' respective rights arising as a result of or in connection with such relationship." Section 19-3-3.1 Same sex marriages prohibited "(a) It is declared to be the public policy of this state to recognize the union only of man and woman.
Same-sex marriage law in the United States by state | Georgia
Due to the perceived "balance" between both sexes, they were typically chosen for certain societal and communal roles, such as spiritual healers. They would traditionally wear female clothes and do female work, and some would have sexual relations with men which was accepted by the tribe. (See also "LGBT rights in the Navajo Nation") The Tohono O'odham recognize the term "wi:k’ovat", which refers to individuals who are assigned male at birth but act, dress and behave as female. Other people groups recognize similar terms in reference to transgender people and gender variance; male-to-female individuals are "hova" among the Hopi, "alyha" among the Mohave, "ilyaxai'" among the Maricopa, "tüwasawuts" among the Southern Paiute, "ndéʼsdzan" among the Western Apache, "elxa'" among the Quechan, and "elha" among the Cocopah, whereas female-to-male individuals are "hwame" among the Mohave, "kwiraxame'" among the Maricopa, "kwe'rhame" among the Quechan, and "warrhameh" among the Cocopah.
LGBT rights in Arizona | History and legality of same-sex sexual activity
In 2008 Heinrich said, "I am not supportive of gay marriage, but I do believe that everybody in the United States has the same civil rights in front of the government. So I think it's important that civil rights that are available to heterosexual couples should be available to every single gay couple who also wants to make the same sort of commitments." After his 2012 Senate primary opponent, Hector Balderas, announced his support for same-sex marriage, Heinrich's staff released a statement to the "New Mexico Independent" newspaper stating, "Martin has supported gay marriage for some time. I just don't think he was asked about it.
Martin Heinrich | Same-sex marriage
On June 4, 2013, the Bisbee City Council approved an ordinance legalizing civil unions for same-sex couples; it took effect 30 days later. On June 19, 2013, the Tucson City Council unanimously approved a civil unions ordinance. On July 5, the first civil union was established in Bisbee. The councils of several towns and cities followed Bisbee and Tucson in adopting a civil union ordinance: Jerome on July 30, Sedona on September 24, Clarkdale on November 12, and Cottonwood on December 17. A proposal for such an ordinance failed in Camp Verde in February 2014.
Same-sex marriage in Arizona | Local civil unions
Also in February 2015, the Central Council of Tlingit and Haida Indian Tribes of Alaska announced its courts were authorized to allow the performance of same-sex marriages. In March 2015, same-sex marriage was legalized in Nebraska, but that was stayed until the next Monday to give state officials time to appeal the ruling and ask for an extension of the stay, and then the Eighth Circuit granted the state's request, which placed same-sex marriage in Nebraska on hold until the federal appeals court ruled on Nebraska's marriage ban. Also in March 2015, the Alabama supreme court ordered Alabama's probate judges to stop issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples, stating that a previous federal ruling that same-sex marriage bans violate the US constitution did not preclude them from following state law, which defined marriage as between a man and a woman.
History of gay men in the United States | 2015
On 11 May 2016, the Director of the Civil Registry of the State of Sonora, Martha Julissa Bojórquez Castillo, announced that same-sex couples could begin marrying in the state without the need for an amparo (i.e. court order). More than 12 court orders had been granted to same-sex couples in Sonora prior to the decision, more than the 5 necessary to make the state's offending provisions in the Civil Code null and inoperable. Almost immediately after the aforementioned decision, the civil registrar of the municipality of Navojoa announced that same-sex couples would still have to be granted an injunction to be able to marry in the municipality.
Same-sex marriage in Sonora | Decision of the Director of the Civil Registry
! style="width:190px;"| Poll source ! style="width:200px;"| Date(s)administered ! class=small | Samplesize ! error ! style="width:100px;"| % support ! style="width:100px;"| % opposition ! style="width:40px;"| % no opinion
Same-sex marriage in Utah | Public opinion
State marriage laws do not explicitly require married couples to be of different genders and prior to December 2013 state courts had not ruled on the question of same-sex marriage. New Mexico has never recognised alternative relationship recognition schemes, such as civil unions or domestic partnerships. In January 2011, state Attorney General Gary King issued an opinion that valid same-sex marriages contracted in other states "would likely be valid in New Mexico". On December 19, 2013, the New Mexico Supreme Court ruled that the state must provide same-sex couples with the same marriage rights as different-sex couples, making New Mexico the 17th U.S.
LGBT rights in New Mexico | Recognition of same-sex relationships
In August 2013, several counties began issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples either on the initiative of the county clerk or under court order. On August 21, 2013, officials in Doña Ana County began issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples at the courthouse in Las Cruces. The county clerk, Lynn Ellins, announced the change of policy, stating, "After careful review of New Mexico's laws it is clear that the state's marriage statutes are gender neutral and do not expressly prohibit Doña Ana County from issuing marriage licenses to same-gender couples. Any further denial of marriage licenses to these couples violates the United States and New Mexico Constitution and the New Mexico Human Rights Act.
Same-sex marriage in New Mexico | 2013
Texts: Section 21. Limitation on recognition of marriage. "Only a marriage between a male and female person shall be recognized and given effect in this state." Section 122.020 "1. Except as otherwise provided in this section, two persons, regardless of gender, at least 18 years of age, not nearer of kin than second cousins or cousins of the half blood, and not having a [husband or wife] spouse living, may be joined in marriage."
Same-sex marriage law in the United States by state | Nevada
On March 21, 2013, in "Griego v. Oliver", Rose Griego, her partner, along with another lesbian couple, as represented by the American Civil Liberties Union and others, filed a lawsuit in State District Court in Albuquerque challenging the Bernalillo County clerk's refusal to issue them marriage licenses. On June 6, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint where they were joined by three more same-sex couples seeking relief. On August 16, the plaintiffs filed a second amended complaint, adding one more couple seeking relief, while also claiming that New Mexico's refusal to recognize their marriages "deprives [the plaintiffs] of hundreds of protections, benefits, and obligations of marriage that the federal government now provides to married same-sex couples in light of the United States Supreme Court's decision in "United States v.
Same-sex marriage in New Mexico | District Court
In May 2012, the Secretary of State of Quintana Roo reversed the annulments and allowed for future same-sex marriages to be performed in the state.
Same-sex marriage | Mexico
The consent of the parties is essential. The marriage ceremony may be regarded either as a civil ceremony or as a religious sacrament, but the marriage relation shall only be entered into, maintained or abrogated as provided by law." "All marriages contracted without this state, which would be valid by the laws of the country in which the same were contracted, shall be valid in all courts and places in this state. It is the strong public policy of this state only to recognize as valid marriages from other states that are between a man and a woman."
Same-sex marriage law in the United States by state | Kansas