List of U.S. ballot initiatives to repeal LGBT anti-discrimination laws
US ballot initiatives to repeal LGBT anti-discrimination laws are anti-LGBT initiatives used to target and repeal LGBTQanti-discrimination laws in the United States. These efforts started in 1972 and continue through at least 2018 on the state and local level.[citation needed]
History
Jurisdictions in the United States began outlawing discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation in 1972, when East Lansing, Michigan, passed an ordinance forbidding discrimination based on "affectional or sexual preference".[1] In response, opponents began organizing campaigns to place measures on their local ballots to repeal these anti-discrimination laws. The repeal movement found a national spokesperson in Anita Bryant, who helped found—and served as president of—Save Our Children. Save Our Children organized in Florida in 1977 in response to the passage by the Dade County Commission of an anti-discrimination ordinance.[citation needed] Bryant's campaign was successful; the Miami-Dade ordinance was repealed by a greater than two-to-one margin. Repeal campaigns, building on this success, spread nationally and several other ordinances were repealed. In California in 1978, conservative state senator John Briggs sponsored Proposition 6, which would have barred gay and lesbian people from working in a public school. The defeat of this measure, and of an ordinance repeal measure in Seattle, Washington, the same day, stalled the momentum of the repeal forces.[citation needed]
The mid-1980s and early 1990s saw a resurgence in ballot initiatives, culminating in proposed state constitutional amendments in Oregon and Colorado not only to repeal existing anti-discrimination ordinances but to proactively prohibit the state and any local unit of government within the state from ever passing such an ordinance. In 1992, Oregon's Measure 9 sponsored by the Oregon Citizens Alliance failed, but Colorado's Amendment 2 passed. Amendment 2 was declared unconstitutional by the United States Supreme Court in its 1996 Romer v. Evans decision. Oregon and two other states, Idaho and Maine, had initiatives between the passage of Amendment 2 and the Court decision; all three were defeated but many municipalities within Oregon passed local measures.[citation needed]
As the question of same-sex marriage has risen to greater prominence, opponents of such marriages have turned their attention to passing constitutional amendments barring individual states from legalizing same-sex marriages or recognizing such marriages performed in other jurisdictions. These amendments are listed here. Before the marriage issue arose, some jurisdictions had begun providing limited rights and benefits to same-sex domestic partners. These ordinances also became targets of repeal efforts, with repeal supporters meeting with less success.[citation needed]
The first attempt to restrict gay and lesbian rights through a state wide ballot measure occurred in 1978 in California.[2] While the measure failed, the late-1980s and early 1990s saw a resurgence in ballot initiatives, culminating in proposed state constitutional amendments in Oregon and Colorado not only to repeal existing anti-discrimination ordinances but to proactively prohibit the state and any local unit of government within the state from ever passing such an ordinance. Oregon's Measure 9, sponsored by the Oregon Citizens Alliance, failed, but Colorado's Amendment 2 passed. Amendment 2 was declared unconstitutional by the United States Supreme Court in its 1996 Romer v. Evans decision. Oregon and two other states, Idaho and Maine, had initiatives between the passage of Amendment 2 and the Court decision; all three were defeated but many municipalities within Oregon passed local measures.
Measure 8: “Revokes ban on sexual orientation discrimination in state executive branch.”[4]
The measure was aimed at Governor Neil Goldschmidt’s executive order (EO-87-20), which prohibited employment discrimination within the executive branch based on sexual orientation, both in hiring and the performance of job duties.[5]
Amendment 2, to repeal all gay rights ordinances within the state and to prevent the state or any political subdivision from passing new gay rights ordinances
Measure 9. Would amend the Oregon Constitution to prohibit the state, counties, and municipalities from legally recognizing homosexuality as a minority status, and prohibit the passing of anti-discrimination laws based on sexual orientation; prohibit the state, counties, and municipalities from using public funds and properties to “promote, encourage, or facilitate homosexuality;” and require state, county, and municipal agencies, specifically the Oregon Department of Education, to “assist in setting a standard for Oregon’s youth that recognizes homosexuality, pedophilia, sadism and masochism as abnormal, wrong, unnatural, and perverse and that these behaviors are to be discouraged and avoided.”[11]
Measure 13: “SUMMARY: Amends state Constitution. Governments cannot:
create classifications based on homosexuality;
advise or teach children, students, employees that homosexuality equates legally or socially with race, other protected classifications;
spend public funds in manner promoting or expressing approval of homosexuality;
grant spousal benefits, marital status based on homosexuality;
deny constitutional rights, services due under existing statutes.
Measure nonetheless allows adult library books addressing homosexuality with adult-only access. Public employees’ private lawful sexual behaviors may be cause for personnel action, if those behaviors disrupt workplace.” [13]
After failing to pass Measure 9 in 1992, OCA turned its attention to passing anti-discrimination bans at the county and municipal level. Couching the debate in terms of forbidding LGBT people from receiving so-called "special rights", OCA sought not only to block ordinances in these communities but to bar them from spending money to "promote homosexuality".[19] OCA was successful in passing over two dozen initiatives. However, in 1993 the Oregon Legislative Assembly passed a law prohibiting local governments from considering LGBT rights measures so the ordinances had no legal force.[20] The Oregon Court of Appeals upheld the state law in 1995.[21] Two weeks after the United States Supreme Court ruled in Romer, OCA suspended its efforts for a third statewide ballot initiative.[22]
Would prohibit the city from recognizing homosexuality, passing anti-discrimination laws based on homosexuality, and from using city funds and properties to "promote" homosexuality.[36]
Would prohibit the city from recognizing homosexuality, passing anti-discrimination laws based on homosexuality, and from using city funds and properties to "promote" homosexuality.[38]
Passed with almost 58.5% of the vote. However, the Florida Supreme Court later ruled that 462 signatures from the initiative petition were invalid and voided the repeal.[9][40]
Ballot Issue 3, to prevent the city from enacting any gay rights ordinances.
Passed with 67% of the vote. Despite being worded almost identically to Colorado's Amendment 2, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the measure as constitutional in 1997.[41] Cincinnati voters repealed Issue 3 in 2004.[9][42]
“SUMMARY: Amends City Charter. Prohibits City from extending minority status based on homosexuality, sexual orientation or preference and from enforcing such laws. Prohibits City spending to promote or approve homosexuality. Does not deny City services based on lawful sexual practices. Does not forbid public library materials for adults. Does not nullify civil rights based on race, religion, color, sex, marital status, familial status, national origin, age or disability. Does not limit constitutional rights. Allows laws which prohibit employment discrimination based on non-work related reasons.” [44]
To repeal Ordinance 12781, an ordinance prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity and establishing domestic partnership benefits for city employees.
Passed by a vote of 62.58% in favor of repeal and 37.42% against.[59]
To repeal Ordinance 5703 Chapter 119, an ordinance to protect and safeguard the right and opportunity of all persons to be free from discrimination based on real or perceived race, ethnicity, national origin, age, gender, gender identity, gender expression, familial status, marital status, socioeconomic background, religion, sexual orientation, disability and veteran status.
Passed by a vote of 51.66% in favor of repeal and 48.34% against.[60]
^Terhune, Chad (December 13, 1994). "Gainesville repeals gay resolution". The Ocala (FL) Star-Banner. NYT Regional Newspapers. p. 2C. Retrieved January 14, 2012.