2008 California Proposition 8

Successful referendum on banning same-sex marriage Proposition 8 other uses Proposition 8 (disambiguation) May 2026 February 2026 Proposition 8 California Eliminates Right of Same-Sex Couples to Marry. Initiative Constitutional Amendment.Changes California Constitution to eliminate the right of same-sex couples to marry. Provides that only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.Fiscal Impact: Over next few years, potential revenue loss, mainly sales taxes, totaling in the several tens of millions of dollars, to state and local governments. In the long run, likely little fiscal impact on state and local governments.Official General Election Ballot San Luis Obispo County, California November 4, 2008 https://www.slocounty.ca.gov/departments/clerk-recorder/forms-documents/elections-and-voting/past-elections/general-elections/2008-11-04-general/sample-ballot/sample-ballot-ballot-type-33-2008-11-04 live https://web.archive.org/web/20260916005958/https://www.slocounty.ca.gov/departments/clerk-recorder/forms-documents/elections-and-voting/past-elections/general-elections/2008-11-04-general/sample-ballot/sample-ballot-ballot-type-33-2008-11-04 September 16, 2026 September 15, 2026 County of San Luis Obispo 7,001,084 6,401,482 13,743,177 17,304,091 79.42 300px County results 300px Congressional district results 300px Precinct results Yes #2B2457 90%–100% 1px #AAAAAA solid #28497C 80%–90% 1px #AAAAAA solid #47729E 70%–80% 1px #AAAAAA solid #7D9CBB 60%–70% 1px #AAAAAA solid #B6C8D9 50%–60% 1px #AAAAAA solid No #32320C 90%–100% 1px #AAAAAA solid #5D5D2D 80%–90% 1px #AAAAAA solid #8B8B54 70%–80% 1px #AAAAAA solid #BCBC83 60%–70% 1px #AAAAAA solid #DEDEBD 50%–60% 1px #AAAAAA solid Sources:https://elections.cdn.sos.ca.gov/sov/2008-general/ssov/10-ballot-measures-statewide-summary-by-county.pdf 2008 Election in Californiahttps://elections.cdn.sos.ca.gov/sov/2008-general/3_voter_part_stats_by_county.pdf VOTER PARTICIPATION STATISTICS BY COUNTY November 4, 2008 Proposition 8, known informally as Prop 8, was a California ballot proposition and a state constitutional amendment intended to ban same-sex marriage. It passed in the November 2008 California state elections but was later overturned by the courts, which found the amendment unconstitutional in comparison to the U.S. Constitution. The proposition was created by opponents of same-sex marriage in advancehttps://www.christianpost.com/news/pro-family-group-says-effort-to-ban-calif-gay-marriage-looks-strong-31814/ Pro-Family Group Says Effort to Ban Calif. Gay 'Marriage' Looks 'Strong' Christianpost.com 2008-04-05 2013-11-01 of the California Supreme Court's May 2008 appeal ruling, In re Marriage Cases, which found the ban in 2000 on same-sex marriage (Proposition 22) unconstitutional. Proposition 8 was ultimately ruled unconstitutional in 2010 by a federal court on different grounds, although the ruling did not go into effect until June 26, 2013, following the conclusion of appeals. Proposition 8 countermanded the May 2008 ruling by adding Proposition 22 wording as an amendment to the California Constitution, providing that "only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California".Text of Proposition 8 https://web.archive.org/web/20130418150058/http://voterguide.sos.ca.gov/past/2008/general/text-proposed-laws/text-of-proposed-laws.pdf#prop8 2013-04-18 , Official Voter Information Guide (draft copy). Retrieved July 28, 2008 It was ruled constitutional by the California Supreme Court in Strauss v. Horton in 2009, on the grounds that it "carved out a limited [or 'narrow'] exception to the state equal protection clause"; in his dissent, Justice Carlos R. Moreno wrote that exceptions to the Equal Protection Clause could not be made by any majority, since its whole purpose was to protect minorities against the will of a majority. Legal challenges to Prop 8 were presented quickly after its approval. Following affirmation of Prop 8 by the state courts, two same-sex couples filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California in the case Perry v. Schwarzenegger (later Hollingsworth v. Perry). In August 2010, Chief Judge Vaughn Walker ruled that Prop 8 was unconstitutional under both the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the U.S. Fourteenth Amendment,Judge strikes down Prop. 8, allows gay marriage in California http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2010/08/prop8-gay-marriage.html Los Angeles Times August 4, 2010 February 22, 2012 since Prop 8 purported to re-remove rights from a disfavored class only, with no rational basis. The official proponents' justifications for Prop 8 were analyzed in over fifty pages covering eighty findings of fact. The state government supported the ruling and refused to defend Prop 8.https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/12-144_8ok0.pdf Hollingsworth et al. v. Perry et al. Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit No. 12–144. Argued March 26, 2013—Decided June 26, 2013 2013-12-03 February 5, 2019 https://web.archive.org/web/20190205234747/https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/12-144_8ok0.pdf dead The ruling was stayed, pending appeal by the proponents of Prop 8. On February 7, 2012, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, in a 2–1 decision, reached the same conclusion as the district court, but on narrower grounds. The court ruled that it was unconstitutional for California to take marriage rights away from same-sex couples shortly after having granted them. The ruling was stayed pending appeal to the United States Supreme Court.https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/general/2012/02/07/1016696com.pdf No. 10-16606 February 7, 2012 US Courts April 17, 2021 On June 26, 2013, the Supreme Court of the United States issued its decision on the appeal in the case Hollingsworth v. Perry, ruling that proponents of initiatives such as Prop 8 did not possess legal standing in their own right to defend the resulting law in federal court, either to the Supreme Court or (previously) to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Therefore, the Supreme Court vacated the decision of the Ninth Circuit, and remanded the case for further proceedings. The decision left the district court's 2010 ruling intact.http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/06/26/19155307-prop-8-ruling-explained-why-gay-marriage-will-resume-in-california Prop 8 ruling explained: Why gay marriage will resume in California. NBC June 26, 2013 NBC News 2013-06-26 2013-12-03Savage David G. https://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-prop-8-supreme-court-ruling-20130626,0,5931694.story Prop. 8: Supreme Court clears way for gay marriage in California. Los Angeles Times June 26, 2013 Politics Now Los Angeles Times 2013-06-26 2013-12-03https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2013/06/26/us/annotated-supreme-court-decision-on-proposition-8.html Guide to the Supreme Court Decision on Proposition 8. John Schwartz 26 June 2013 NYTimes.com On June 28, 2013, the Ninth Circuit, on remand, dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction and dissolved their previous stay of the district court's ruling, enabling Governor Jerry Brown to order same-sex marriages to resume.Dolan Maura https://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-prop-8-gay-marriage-20130628,0,1889039.story Prop 8: Gay marriages can resume in California, court rules Los Angeles Times 2013-06-28 2013-12-03 The passage of Prop 8 received widespread media coverage over its effect on the concurrent 2008 presidential and congressional elections, as well as the pre-election effects Prop 8 had on California's reputation as a historically LGBTQ-friendly state and the same-sex marriage debate that had started after same-sex marriage was legalized in Massachusetts through a 2004 court decision. After the results were certified and same-sex marriages ceased, supporters of Prop 8 were targeted by opponents with actions ranging from some opponents disclosing supporter donations and boycotting proponents' businesses, to others threatening supporters with death and vandalizing churches. A ballot proposal to formally repeal Prop 8 from California's constitution, called Proposition 3, was passed by the California State Legislature in July 2023. The vote to formally repeal Prop 8 was passed by nearly 63% of voters in the 2024 election.Echelman Adam 2024-11-05 Same-sex marriage gains constitutional protections as California voters approve Prop. 3 https://calmatters.org/politics/elections/2024/11/california-election-result-same-sex-marriage/ 2024-11-08 CalMatters en-US Overview In 2000, the State of California adopted Proposition 22 which, as an ordinary statute, forbade recognition or licensing of same-sex marriages in the state. During February and March 2004, San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom directed the licensing of same-sex marriages on the basis of the state's Equal Protection Clause, prompted also by recent events including George W. Bush's proposed constitutional ban, a possible legal case by Campaign for California Families (CCF), and a Supreme Court of Massachusetts ruling deeming same-sex marriage bans unconstitutional and permitting them from May 2004. While only lasting a month before being overruled, this was supported by other cities such as San Jose,https://www.chicagotribune.com/2004/03/10/san-jose-recognizes-gay-marriage/ San Jose recognizes gay marriage Chicago Tribune March 10, 2004 February 21, 2012 gained global attention, and led to the case In re Marriage Cases, in which Proposition 22 was found (San Francisco County Superior Court, March 14, 2005) and confirmed upon appeal (California Supreme Court, May 15, 2008) to be unconstitutional. Proposition 8 was created by opponents of same-sex marriage prior to the final ruling on In re Marriage Cases as a voter ballot initiative, and voted on at the time of the November 2008 elections. Its wording was precisely the same as Proposition 22, which as an ordinary statute, had been invalidated in 2008, but by re-positioning it as a state constitutional amendment rather than a legislative statute, it was able to circumvent the ruling from In re Marriage Cases.http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/.const/.article_18 California Constitution Article XVIII https://web.archive.org/web/20081210120948/http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/.const/.article_18 2008-12-10 The proposition did not affect domestic partnerships in California,http://www.ocregister.com/articles/domestic-gay-marriage-2299598-couples-married Gays would lose few legal rights with marriage ban Orange County Register Wisckol, Martin February 4, 2009 February 12, 2009 February 12, 2009 https://web.archive.org/web/20090212125613/http://www.ocregister.com/articles/domestic-gay-marriage-2299598-couples-married nor (following subsequent legal rulings) did it reverse same-sex marriages that had been performed during the interim period May to November 2008 (i.e. after In re Marriage Cases but before Proposition 8).https://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/27/us/27marriage.html California High Court Upholds Gay Marriage Ban The New York Times John Schwartz May 26, 2009 December 17, 2009http://www.ftb.ca.gov/individuals/same_sex_marriage/index.shtml https://web.archive.org/web/20080806090710/http://www.ftb.ca.gov/individuals/Same_sex_marriage/index.shtml August 6, 2008 Same-Sex Married Couples California Franchise Tax Board 2009-05-26 December 17, 2009Fowler Geoffrey A. Court Rejects State Ban On Gay Marriage The Wall Street Journal February 8, 2012 Bravin, Jess A1, A4 Proposition 8 came into immediate effect on November 5, 2008, the day after the elections. Demonstrations and protests occurred across the state and nation. Same-sex couples and government entities, including couples who had married before then, filed numerous lawsuits with the California Supreme Court challenging the proposition's validity and effect on previously administered same-sex marriages. In Strauss v. Horton, the California Supreme Court upheld Proposition 8, but allowed the existing same-sex marriages to stand (under the grandfather clause principle). (Justice Carlos R. Moreno dissented that exceptions to the equal protection clause could not be made by any majority since its whole purpose was to protect minorities against the will of a majority.) Although upheld in state court, Proposition 8 was ruled unconstitutional by the federal courts. In Perry v. Schwarzenegger, United States District Court Judge Vaughn Walker overturned Proposition 8 on August 4, 2010, ruling that it violated both the Due Process and Equal Protection clauses of the U.S. Constitution.Ruling by United States District Court http://www.sfgate.com/chronicle/acrobat/2010/08/04/Prop-8-Ruling-FINAL.pdf San Francisco Chronicle https://web.archive.org/web/20120307020106/http://www.sfgate.com/chronicle/acrobat/2010/08/04/Prop-8-Ruling-FINAL.pdf 2012-03-07 Walker issued a stay (injunction) against enforcing Proposition 8 and a stay to determine suspension of his ruling pending appeal.Egelko Bob Bulwa Demian Judge strikes down ban on same-sex marriage http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/08/04/MNQS1EOR3D.DTL&tsp=1 https://web.archive.org/web/20100806043820/http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/08/04/MNQS1EOR3D.DTL&tsp=1 dead August 6, 2010 San Francisco Chronicle August 4, 2010 August 4, 2010 Keys Matthew Federal Judge: Same Sex Marriage Ban Under Proposition 8 Violates Constitution http://www.fox40.com/news/headlines/ktxl-news-prop8verdict0804,0,598175.story FOX40.com August 4, 2010 https://web.archive.org/web/20120807063037/http://www.fox40.com/news/headlines/ktxl-news-prop8verdict0804%2C0%2C598175.story 2012-08-07 The State of California did not appeal the ruling (with which it had agreed anyway) leaving the initiative proponents and one county to seek an appeal. On appeal, a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals panel ruled the county had no right of appeal, and asked the California Supreme Court to rule whether the proponents of Prop 8 had the right to appeal (known as "standing") if the state did not do so. The California Supreme Court ruled that they did. The Ninth Circuit affirmed the federal district court's decision on February 7, 2012,http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2012/02/gay-marriage-prop-8s-ban-ruled-unconstitutional.html Prop. 8: Gay-marriage ban unconstitutional, court rules Los Angeles Times February 7, 2012 February 7, 2011 but the stay remained in place as appeals continued to the U.S. Supreme Court, http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/08/16/BAEE1EUOIF.DTL San Francisco Chronicle Prop. 8: Appeals court puts ruling on hold Demian Bulwa Kevin Fagan Rachel Gordon August 22, 2010 https://web.archive.org/web/20120304103933/http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=%2Fc%2Fa%2F2010%2F08%2F16%2FBAEE1EUOIF.DTL 2012-03-04 which heard oral arguments in the appeal Hollingsworth v. Perry on March 26, 2013.https://www.supremecourt.gov/Search.aspx?FileName=/docketfiles/12-144.htm Hollingsworth v. Perry, Proceedings and Orders Supreme Court of the United States January 7, 2013 On June 26, 2013, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal and ruled that the Ninth Circuit had erred in allowing the previous appeal, since in line with Article III of the Constitution and many prior cases unanimous on the point, being an initiative proponents is not enough by itself to have federal court standing or appeal a ruling in federal court. This left the original federal district court ruling against Proposition 8 as the outcome, and same sex marriages resumed almost immediately afterwards. History of the ballot initiative In 2005, the site ProtectMarriage.com was created as the "Official website for the California Constitutional Marriage Amendment" and launched a campaign to pass a ballot proposition to constitutionally prohibit same-sex marriage.http://protectmarriage.com/newsdetail.php?newsId=90 Protect Marriage protectmarriage.com In 2007, ProtectMarriage.com tried and failed to get Initiative 1254, a proposed ballot proposition to constitutionally prohibit same-sex marriage on the 2008 California ballot.https://repository.uclawsf.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2440&context=ca_ballot_inits Limit On Marriage. Constitutional Amendment. On November 29, 2007, was the official summary date for California Marriage Protection, also called Limit On Marriage. Constitutional Amendment and numbered 07-0068 by the Attorney General of California and Initiative 1298 by California Secretary of State. In order to qualify for the ballot, a measure needed 694,354 petition signatures, an amount equal to 8 percent of the votes cast during the 2006 California gubernatorial election. In late April 2008, ProtectMarriage.com submitted a petition containing 1,120,801 signatures, which was 426,447 more signatures than was necessary to put the measure on the ballot. On June 2, 2008, California Secretary of State Debra Bowen said a random sample check of signatures submitted by the measure's sponsors showed that they had gathered enough names to qualify and certified it as the eighth initiative for the November 4, 2008, general election ballot.http://www.sos.ca.gov/executive/press_releases/2008/DB08_068.pdf https://web.archive.org/web/20080615021154/http://www.sos.ca.gov/executive/press_releases/2008/DB08_068.pdf dead 2008-06-15 Secretary of State Debra Bowen Certifies Eighth Measure for November 4, 2008, General Electionhttps://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna24939738 Gay marriage ban qualifies for California ballot June 3, 2008 NBC Newshttp://www.sos.ca.gov/admin/press-releases/2008/DB08-068.pdf Secretary of State Debra Bowen Certifies Eighth Measure for November 4, 2008, General Election Folmar Kate June 2, 2008 California Secretary of State August 7, 2008 https://web.archive.org/web/20080910135125/http://www.sos.ca.gov/admin/press-releases/2008/DB08-068.pdf September 10, 2008 Proposition 8 (ballot title: Eliminates Rights of Same-Sex Couples to Marry. Initiative Constitutional Amendment; originally titled the "California Marriage Protection Act")Sayre, Ben; Bode, Leticia; Shah, Dhavan; Wilcox, Dave; and Shah, Chirag (2010) "Agenda Setting in a Digital Age: Tracking Attention to California Proposition 8 in Social Media, Online News and Conventional News", Policy & Internet: Vol. 2: Iss. 2, Article 2, Page 11. 10.2202/1944-2866.1040Text of Proposed Laws https://vig.cdn.sos.ca.gov/2008/general/text-proposed-laws/text-of-proposed-laws.pdf#prop8 Official Voter Information Guide State of California August 28, 2012 128 SECTION 1. Title: This measure shall be known and may be cited as the "California Marriage Protection Act." was a California ballot proposition that changed the California Constitution to add a new section 7.5 to Article I, which reads: "Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California."Scan of Initiative filing https://web.archive.org/web/20150425203101/http://ag.ca.gov/cms_pdfs/initiatives/i737_07-0068_Initiative.pdf 2015-04-25 from California Attorney General's web site"Propositions that are on the November 4, 2008 General Election Ballot https://web.archive.org/web/20090617213215/http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/elections_j.htm June 17, 2009 ", California Secretary of State This change restricted the definition of marriage to opposite-sex couples, and eliminated same-sex couples' right to marry, thereby overriding portions of the ruling of In re Marriage Cases by "carving out an exception to the preexisting scope of the privacy and due process clauses"http://www.courts.ca.gov/documents/S168047.pdf California Supreme Court Concurring Decision by Werdeger 35 Werdegar, Kathryn Mickle May 26, 2009 February 11, 2012 January 20, 2012 https://web.archive.org/web/20120120152803/http://www.courts.ca.gov/documents/S168047.pdf dead of the state constitution. Full text Proposition 8 consisted of two sections. Its full text was:Scan of Initiative https://web.archive.org/web/20150425203101/http://ag.ca.gov/cms_pdfs/initiatives/i737_07-0068_Initiative.pdf 2015-04-25 from California Attorney General website. SECTION 1. Title This measure shall be known and may be cited as the "California Marriage Protection Act." SECTION 2. Article I, Section 7.5 is added to the California Constitution, to read: Sec. 7.5. Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California. Pre-election legal challenges Petition to remove proposition from ballot California Constitution#Amendments and revisions On July 16, 2008, the California Supreme Court denied a petition calling for the removal of Proposition 8 from the November ballot. The petition asserted the proposition should not be on the ballot on the grounds it was a constitutional revision that only the legislature or a constitutional convention could place before voters. Opponents also argued that the petitions circulated to qualify the measure for the ballot inaccurately summarized its effect. The court denied the petition without comment.https://www.latimes.com/news/local/politics/cal/la-me-gaymarriage17-2008jul17,0,4823383.story Bid to ban gay marriage will stay on ballot, California Supreme Court rules Dolan Maura July 17, 2008 Los Angeles Times August 7, 2008 As a general rule, it is improper for courts to adjudicate pre-election challenges to a measure's substantive validity.Costa v. Superior Court (2006) 37 Cal.4th 986, 1005–1006. The question of whether Proposition 8 is a constitutional amendment or constitutional revision was ruled on by the California Supreme Court on May 26, 2009, and found that it was not a revision and therefore would be upheld. They also declared that the same-sex marriages performed prior to the passing of Prop 8 would remain valid. Official Prop 8 Ruling Document SFist May 26, 2009 http://sfist.com/2009/05/26/official_prop_8_ruling_document.php May 26, 2009 https://web.archive.org/web/20090529082536/http://sfist.com/2009/05/26/official_prop_8_ruling_document.php May 29, 2009 Challenge to title and summary The measure was titled: "Eliminates Rights of Same-Sex Couples to Marry. Initiative Constitutional Amendment." The ballot summary read that the measure "changes the California Constitution to eliminate the right of same-sex couples to marry in California."http://ag.ca.gov/cms_attachments/initiatives/pdfs/i737_07-0068_title_and_summary.pdf Initiative Measure Title and Summary (07-0068) California Attorney General November 29, 2007 June 23, 2008 https://web.archive.org/web/20080624224338/http://ag.ca.gov/cms_attachments/initiatives/pdfs/i737_07-0068_title_and_summary.pdf June 24, 2008 http://voterguide.sos.ca.gov/past/2008/general/title-sum/prop8-title-sum.htm PDF Ballot Label (Proposition 8) California Secretary of State July 3, 2008 https://web.archive.org/web/20090430043558/http://voterguide.sos.ca.gov/past/2008/general/title-sum/prop8-title-sum.htm April 30, 2009 Proponents of the measure objected to the wording of the ballot title and summary on the grounds that they were argumentative and prejudicial. The resulting legal petition Jansson v. BowenGarrison Jessica Opponents of gay marriage say they will sue over changed wording in Proposition 8 Los Angeles Times July 29, 2008 was dismissed August 7, 2008, by California Superior Court Judge Timothy M. Frawley, who ruled that "the title and summary includes an essentially verbatim recital of the text of the measure itself", California Elections Code http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=elec&group=09001-10000&file=9050-9054 The State of California December 6, 2008 https://web.archive.org/web/20090730233240/http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=elec&group=09001-10000&file=9050-9054 July 30, 2009 and that the change was valid because the measure did, in fact, eliminate a right upheld by the California Supreme Court. thumb|200px|As California State Attorney General, Jerry Brown (shown here campaigning for governor in 2010) had the ballot's description and title changed from "Limit on Marriage" to "Eliminates the right of same-sex couples to marry". Jerry Brown's wording may trip up Prop. 8 Phillip Matier Andrew Ross http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Jerry-Brown-s-wording-may-trip-up-Prop-8-3188163.php San Francisco Chronicle October 26, 2008 June 27, 2013 California Attorney General Jerry Brown explained that the changes were required to more "accurately reflect the measure" in light of the California Supreme Court's intervening In re Marriage Cases decision. Jansson v. Bowen, et al. Petition for Writ of Mandate, Order After Hearing Superior Court of California, County of Sacramento August 7, 2008 http://ag.ca.gov/cms_attachments/press/pdfs/n1597_ruling_on_proposition_8.pdf On July 22, 2008, Proposition 8 supporters mounted a legal challenge to the revised ballot title and summary, contending that Attorney General Brown inserted "language [...] so inflammatory that it will unduly prejudice voters against the measure".https://www.ewtnnews.com/world/us/lawsuit-filed-to-challenge-california-ballots-inflammatory-rewording-of-marriage-amendment Lawsuit filed to challenge California ballot's 'inflammatory' rewording of marriage amendment August 1, 2008 CNA Catholic News Agency March 28, 2009 February 14, 2009 live https://web.archive.org/web/20090214114326/http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=13415 Supporters claimed that research showed that an attorney general had never used an active verb like "eliminates" in the title of a ballot measure in the past fifty years in which ballot measures have been used. Representatives of the attorney general produced twelve examples of ballot measures using the word "eliminates" and vouched for the neutrality and accuracy of the ballot language.https://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2008/07/28/20080728gaymarriagecalif0728-ON.html Gay marriage foes challenge ballot wording Garrison Jessica July 28, 2008 AZ Central.com August 7, 2008 http://blogcabinca.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/A.G.%20RJN.pdf Request for judicial notice in support of opposition to petition for writ of mandate Attorney General of the State of California August 4, 2008 https://web.archive.org/web/20090327045034/http://blogcabinca.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/A.G.%20RJN.pdf 2009-03-27 On August 8, 2008, the California Superior Court turned down the legal challenge, affirming the new title and summary, stating, "the title and summary is not false or misleading because it states that Proposition 8 would 'eliminate the right of same-sex couples to marry' in California." The Superior Court based their decision on the previous Marriages Cases ruling in which the California Supreme Court held that same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry under the California Constitution.https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Judge-refuses-to-order-change-in-Prop-8-title-3200417.php Judge refuses to order change in Prop. 8 title Egelko Bob August 8, 2008 San Francisco Chronicle August 8, 2008 That same day, proponents of Prop. 8 filed an emergency appeal with the state appeals court. The Court of Appeal denied their petition later that day and supporters did not seek a review by the Supreme Court of California.Bob Egelko https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Prop-8-backers-drop-challenge-on-wording-3199955.php Prop. 8 backers drop challenge on wording San Francisco Chronicle August 12, 2008http://appellatecases.courtinfo.ca.gov/search/case/dockets.cfm?dist=3&doc_id=1374371&doc_no=C059606 Order Denying Petition (Case No. C059606) California Court of Appeal, 3rd District August 8, 2008 The deadline for court action on the wording of ballot summaries and arguments in the voter pamphlet was August 11, 2008.http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/08/12/BADU128V6V.DTL https://web.archive.org/web/20080814014458/http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/08/12/BADU128V6V.DTL dead August 14, 2008 Prop. 8 backers drop challenge on wording San Francisco Chronicle August 12, 2008 October 25, 2008 Bob Egelko While turning down the challenge to the title and summary, the California Superior Court also found that the Yes on 8 campaign had overstated its ballot argument on the measure's impact on public schools and ordered a minor change in wording. The original arguments included a claim that the Supreme Court's legalization of same-sex marriage requires teachers to tell their students, as young as kindergarten age, that same-sex marriage is the same as opposite-sex marriage. The court said the Yes on 8 argument was false because instruction on marriage is not required and parents can withdraw their children. The court said the ballot argument could be preserved by rewording it to state that teachers "may" or "could" be required to tell children there is no difference between same-sex and opposite-sex marriage. Campaign Campaign funding and spending The pro- and anti-Prop 8 campaigns spent a combined $106 million on the campaign.Reid Wilson, The most expensive ballot initiatives, Washington Post (May 17, 2014). This was not the most expensive California ballot proposition that year, however; the 2008 campaigns for and against Propositions 94, 95, 96, and 97, dealing with the expansion of Native American gambling, surpassed Prop 8, with combined expenditures of $172 million. By election day, volunteers on both sides spent thousands of hours getting their messages across to the state's 17.3 million registered voters. http://www.gilroydispatch.com/news/city_local_government/calif-gay-marriage-ban-sparks-war-of-the-rings/article_bcbd2298-121f-513d-88fd-909e8d556d68.html California marriage initiative sparks 'War of the Rings' Associated Press Gilroy Dispatch Leff Lisa October 2, 2008 August 23, 2016 http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/ror/ror-pages/15day-presgen-08/hist-reg-stats.pdf Record 17.3 million Californians registered to vote California Secretary of State October 20, 2008 August 2, 2013 https://web.archive.org/web/20121017222247/http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/ror/ror-pages/15day-presgen-08/hist-reg-stats.pdf October 17, 2012 The campaigns for and against Proposition 8 raised $39.0 million ($11.3 million or 29.1% from outside California) and $44.1 million ($13.2 million or 30.0% from outside California), respectively,https://projects.latimes.com/prop8/ Proposition 8: Who gave in the gay marriage battle? Los Angeles Times June 30, 2012 from over 64,000 people in all 50 states and more than 20 foreign countries, setting a new record nationally for a social policy initiative and more than for every other race in the country in spending except the presidential contest.https://www.usnews.com/articles/news/national/2008/10/29/california-same-sex-marriage-initiative-campaigns-shatter-spending-records.html California Same-Sex Marriage Initiative Campaigns Shatter Spending Records U.S. News & World Report October 29, 2008 October 29, 2008 Contributions were much greater than those of previous same-sex marriage initiatives. Between 2004 and 2006, 22 such measures were on ballots around the country, and donations to all of them combined totaled $31.4 million, according to OpenSecrets.https://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-marriagemoney25-2008oct25,0,2856145.story Proposition 8 proponents and foes raise $60 million Los Angeles Times October 25, 2008 Dan Morain Jessica Garrison A ProtectMarriage.com spokeswoman estimated that 36 companies which had previously contributed to Equality California were targeted to receive a letter requesting similar donations to ProtectMarriage.com.Prentice Ron Mark Jansson Edward Dolejsi Andrew Pugno Letter addressed to Abbott and Associates towleroad.com October 20, 2008 http://www.towleroad.com/files/prop8threatletter.pdf August 2, 2013 https://www.webcitation.org/6IZ4moNth?url=http://www.towleroad.com/files/prop8threatletter.pdf August 2, 2013 Leff Lisa Calif. gay marriage ban backers target businesses Associated Press October 23, 2008 http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2008/10/23/state/n145556D05.DTL&tsp=1 October 23, 2008 The San Francisco Chronicle https://web.archive.org/web/20081025140332/http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=%2Fn%2Fa%2F2008%2F10%2F23%2Fstate%2Fn145556D05.DTL October 25, 2008 November 13, 2008 http://www.eqca.org/site/pp.asp?c=kuLRJ9MRKrH&b=4026491 Equality California Sponsors https://web.archive.org/web/20081219003909/http://www.eqca.org/site/pp.asp?c=kuLRJ9MRKrH&b=4026491 December 19, 2008Threatening Letters Spark New Prop 8 Controversy KFMB-TV, San Diego October 23, 2008 http://www.cbs8.com/stories/story.144185.html October 23, 2008 https://web.archive.org/web/20081024194454/http://www.cbs8.com/stories/story.144185.html October 24, 2008 The California Fair Political Practices Commission fined the LDS Church in 2010 for failing to follow campaign disclosure policies during the last two weeks leading up to the election, which amounted to $37,000 in non-monetary contributions. They were fined $5,538.http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2010/06/mormon-church-to-be-fined-by-state-political-commission-over-proposition-8.html Mormon Church to be fined by state political commission over Proposition 8 Los Angeles Times June 9, 2010 June 9, 2010 Ruben Vives Both proponents and opponents of Proposition 8 made significant use of online tactics for campaigning. For example, over 800 videos were posted on YouTube, most consisting of original content and most taking a position against the Proposition. A greater proportion of 'Yes on 8' videos were scripted and professionally produced. Many 'No on 8' videos recorded demonstrations in the aftermath of the election.Thorson Kjerstin Brian Ekdale Porismita Borah Kang Namkoong Chirag Shah YouTube and Proposition 8: A case study in video activism Information, Communication & Society 2010 13 3 325 10.1080/13691180903497060 142856714 Proponents thumb|Official ProtectMarriage.com "Yes on 8" campaign signhttp://www.protectmarriage.com/action/yard-sign ProtectMarriage.com "Get a Yard Sign"—the official "Yes on 8" sign. https://web.archive.org/web/20081022201015/http://www.protectmarriage.com/action/yard-sign October 22, 2008 Proponents of the constitutional amendment argued that exclusively heterosexual marriage was "an essential institution of society", that leaving the constitution unchanged would "result in public schools teaching our kids that gay marriage is okay", and that gay people "do not have the right to redefine marriage for everyone else".http://voterguide.sos.ca.gov/past/2008/general/argu-rebut/argu-rebutt8.htm California General Election Tuesday November 4 Voter Information Guide December 6, 2012 sos.ca.gov. https://web.archive.org/web/20121118053915/http://voterguide.sos.ca.gov/past/2008/general/argu-rebut/argu-rebutt8.htm November 18, 2012 The ProtectMarriage.com organization sponsored the initiative that placed Proposition 8 on the ballotJuly 7, 2008 http://www.protectmarriage.com/ ProtectMarriage.com https://web.archive.org/web/20081010125329/http://www.protectmarriage.com/ October 10, 2008 mdy-all and continues to support the measure. The measure also attracted the support of a number of political figures and religious organizations. Political figures Republican presidential nominee and U.S. Senator John McCain released a statement of support for the proposed constitutional amendment.https://www.usnews.com/articles/news/campaign-2008/2008/06/27/mccain-supports-efforts-to-ban-gay-marriage.html McCain Supports Efforts to Ban Gay Marriage June 27, 2008 U.S. News & World Report September 1, 2008 Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich released a video in support. Both characterized the court ruling requiring recognition of same sex marriage as being against the will of the people.Newt Gingrich Stop Imperial Judges...Support Proposition 8 Newt Gingrich https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73Q4V8WNF6k October 1, 2008 A political action committee run by former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney, who personally supported the proposition, donated $10,000 to the National Organization for Marriage during their campaign for the proposition.https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/election-2012/post/romney-under-fire-for-pac-donation-to-anti-gay-marriage-group/2012/03/30/gIQAm7QolS_blog.html The Washington Post Dan Eggen Romney under fire for PAC donation to anti-gay marriage group March 31, 2012 Religious organizations The Roman Catholic Church,https://www.advocate.com/news/2008/08/08/catholic-bishops-endorse-prop-8 Catholic Bishops Endorse Prop. 8 January 22, 2014 2008-08-08 as well as a Roman Catholic lay fraternal organization, the Knights of Columbus,http://www.christiannewswire.com/news/863947548.html Proposition 8 to Protect Marriage Receives $1 Million Donation from the Knights of Columbus Catholic Organization September 19, 2008 August 24, 2008 https://web.archive.org/web/20080824025359/http://www.christiannewswire.com/news/863947548.html dead firmly supported the measure. The bishops of the California Catholic Conference released a statement supporting the proposition,A Statement of the Catholic Bishops of California in Support of Proposition 8 California Catholic Conference http://www.cacatholic.org/index.php/issues2/family-life/marriage-public-policy/465-a-statement-of-the-catholic-bishops-of-california-in-support-of-proposition-8-a-constitutional-amendment-to-restore-the-definition-of-marriage-2 January 22, 2014 https://web.archive.org/web/20140202164147/http://www.cacatholic.org/index.php/issues2/family-life/marriage-public-policy/465-a-statement-of-the-catholic-bishops-of-california-in-support-of-proposition-8-a-constitutional-amendment-to-restore-the-definition-of-marriage-2 February 2, 2014 a position met with mixed reactions among church members, including clergy.https://www.ewtnnews.com/world/us/bishop-of-fresno-removes-priest-who-opposes-prop-8 Catholic Bishops Endorse Prop. 8 September 19, 2008 February 14, 2009 live https://web.archive.org/web/20090214122316/http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=14055http://www.calcatholic.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?id=63e2a05f-01a4-4613-b57e-09e5392dfa14 I was Blackballed February 2, 2009 https://web.archive.org/web/20110708111904/http://www.calcatholic.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?id=63e2a05f-01a4-4613-b57e-09e5392dfa14 July 8, 2011 George Hugh Niederauer as Archbishop of San Francisco campaigned in 2008 in favor of the Proposition, and claimed to have been instrumental in forging alliances between Catholics and Mormons to support the measure.Kuruvila, Matthai (November 10, 2008) "To Pass Measure, Catholics and Mormons Allied". San Francisco Chronicle. (Retrieved 11-10-08.) His successor, Salvatore Cordileone was regarded as instrumental in devising the initiative. Campaign finance records show he personally gave at least $6,000 to back the voter-approved banSalvatore Cordileone, Gay Marriage Opponent And Prop. 8 Creator, Named Archbishop Of San Francisco, Huffington Post 7/27/2012 and was instrumental in raising $1.5 million to put the proposition on the ballot.Nancy Pelosi urges S.F. archbishop to exit marriage march, San Francisco Chronicle, 6/14/14 Subsequently, as archbishop of San Francisco, he has called publicly for an amendment to the US Constitution as "the only remedy in law against judicial activism" following the number of state same-sex marriage bans struck down by federal judges. He also attended and addressed the audience at the "March for Marriage", a rally opposing marriage for same-sex couples, in Washington, D.C., in June 2014.https://religionnews.com/2014/06/19/thousands-rally-u-s-capitol-gay-marriage/ Thousands Rally at U.S. Capital Against Gay Marriage Adams Heather June 19, 2014 Religion News April 17, 2021 In California's 2008 election, the Knights of Columbus attracted media attention when they donated more than $1.4 million to Proposition 8. https://www.scpr.org/news/2012/02/07/31169/la-catholics-react-prop-8-decision-many-catholics-/ LA Catholics react to Prop 8 decision; many Catholics strongly supported the proposition Shereen Marisol Meraji February 7, 2012 89.3 KPCC 2013-08-15 The Order was the largest financial supporter of the successful effort to maintain a legal definition of marriage as the union of one man and one woman.http://cal-access.sos.ca.gov/Campaign/Committees/Detail.aspx?id=1302592&view=late1 California Secretary of State – CalAccess – Campaign Finance California Secretary of State 2013-06-28 thumb|left|Rally for Yes on Prop 8 in Fresno The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saintshttps://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/california-and-same-sex-marriage California and Same-Sex Marriage September 5, 2008 2008-06-30http://www.heraldextra.com/content/view/280669/3/ LDS Donate Millions to Fight Gay Marriage September 17, 2008 https://web.archive.org/web/20080918205109/http://www.heraldextra.com/content/view/280669/3/ September 18, 2008 http://www.washblade.com/2008/9-19/news/national/13307.cfm Prop 8 supporters see surge in donations September 19, 2008 https://web.archive.org/web/20080921101854/http://www.washblade.com/2008/9-19/news/national/13307.cfm September 21, 2008 (LDS Church) also publicly supported the proposition. The First Presidency of the church announced its support for Proposition 8 in a letter intended to be read in every congregation in California. In this letter, church members were encouraged to "do all you can to support the proposed constitutional amendment by donating of your means and time". The church produced and broadcast to its congregations a program describing the support of the Proposition, and describing the timeline it proposes for what it describes as grassroots efforts to support the Proposition.https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/church-readies-members-on-proposition-8 Church Readies Members on Proposition 8 October 8, 2008 February 24, 2009 Local church leaders set organizational and monetary goals for their membership—sometimes quite specific—to fulfill this call.http://www.advocate.com/print_article_ektid67125.asp The New Religious Right The Advocate Kirchick, James June 18, 2009 https://web.archive.org/web/20090214093449/http://www.advocate.com/print_article_ektid67125.asp February 14, 2009 https://messengerandadvocate.files.wordpress.com/2008/06/fp-letter.pdf Preserving Traditional Marriage and Strengthening Families The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints June 20, 2008 June 18, 2009 The response of church members to their leadership's appeals to donate money and volunteer time was very supportive, Preserving the Divine Institution of Marriage The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints http://www.preservingmarriage.org/ October 24, 2008 2008-08-13 such that Latter-day Saints provided a significant source for financial donations in support of the proposition, both inside and outside the State of California.http://www.heraldextra.com/content/view/280669/17/ LDS donate millions to fight gay marriage September 16, 2008 October 30, 2008 https://web.archive.org/web/20081019213322/http://www.heraldextra.com/content/view/280669/17/ October 19, 2008 LDS members contributed over $20 million,Moral Argument, Religion, and Same-Sex Marriage: Advancing the Public Good, Emily R. Gill, Jason Pierceson, page x (introduction) about 45% of out-of-state contributions to ProtectMarriage.com came from Utah, over three times more than any other state.http://www.mercurynews.com/localnewsheadlines/ci_10806730 Opponents of gay marriage ban ride wave of donations October 24, 2008 October 30, 2008 ProtectMarriage, the official proponent of Proposition 8, estimates that about half the donations they received came from Mormon sources, and that LDS church members made up somewhere between 80% and 90% of the volunteers for early door-to-door canvassing.https://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/15/us/politics/15marriage.html Mormons Tipped Scale in Ban on Gay Marriage November 14, 2008 December 24, 2008 The New York Times Jesse McKinley Kirk Johnson Other religious organizations that supported Proposition 8 include the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America,http://www.forward.com/articles/14106/ Orthodox Join Fight Against Gay Nuptials The Forward 29 August 2008 September 19, 2008 Eastern Orthodox Church,https://www.antiochian.org/node/18321 Orthodox Christian Bishops of California in support of Proposition 8 a group of Evangelical Christians led by Jim Garlow and Miles McPherson,https://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/426077.aspx Christian Marriage Movement's Ground Zero September 19, 2008 American Family Association, Focus on the Familyhttp://www.washingtonblade.com/2008/9-19/news/national/13307.cfm?page=2 Prop 8 supporters see surge in donations September 19, 2008 https://web.archive.org/web/20081202142508/http://www.washingtonblade.com/2008/9-19/news/national/13307.cfm?page=2 December 2, 2008 and the National Organization for Marriage.https://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/sep/16/usa.gayrights California's ballot battle over gay marriage shows US cultural divide September 17, 2008 The Guardian London September 16, 2008 McClatchy Newspapers Rick Warren, pastor of Saddleback Church, also endorsed the measure. Warren Rick Pastor Rick's News & Views Saddleback Church October 23, 2008 http://www.saddlebackfamily.com/blogs/newsandviews/index.html?contentID=1502 April 19, 2009 https://web.archive.org/web/20081027085038/http://saddlebackfamily.com/blogs/newsandviews/index.html?contentid=1502 October 27, 2008 mdy-all Others The Grossmont Union High School District in San Diego County, California, publicly voted on a resolution endorsing Proposition 8. The Governing Board voted 4–0 to endorse the amendment of the California State Constitution.Resolution for the Endorsement of Proposition 8—The California Marriage Protection Act July 31, 2008 Grossmont Union High School District http://portal.guhsd.net/portal/page/portal/GUHSD_SUPER/BOARD/BOARD_DOCS/Resolutions/Support%20of%20Prop%208.pdf October 13, 2008 https://web.archive.org/web/20081029064047/http://portal.guhsd.net/portal/page/portal/GUHSD_SUPER/BOARD/BOARD_DOCS/Resolutions/Support%20of%20Prop%208.pdf October 29, 2008 The Asian Heritage Coalition held a rally in support of Proposition 8 in downtown San Diego on October 19, 2008.Craig Gustafson Asian group rallies for traditional marriage October 19, 2008 Union Tribune http://weblog.signonsandiego.com/news/breaking/2008/10/asian_group_rally_for_traditio.html October 19, 2008 https://web.archive.org/web/20090221003359/http://weblog.signonsandiego.com/news/breaking/2008/10/asian_group_rally_for_traditio.html February 21, 2009 During the November 2008 election campaign, Porterville's City Council was the only City Council in California that passed a Resolution in favor of Proposition 8.https://abc30.com/archive/6844975/ Prop 8 debate underway in Porterville Haagenson Gene 2009 KFSN-TV News abc30.com November 9, 2009 Fresno live https://web.archive.org/web/20110604020150/http://abclocal.go.com/kfsn/story?section=news%2Flocal&id=6844975 June 4, 2011 Church of Scientology The San Diego branch of the Church of Scientology publicly supported the proposition by signing an online petition asking for Prop 8. This led to award-winning director, producer and writer Paul Haggis to call on Tommy Davis to denounce the signature. Davis responded to Haggis and told him that it was a single member of the San Diego branch which had signed the petition using the branch name and not a branch decision. Davis then stated that the man had been "handled."2011-02-07 Paul Haggis vs. the Church of Scientology https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2011/02/14/the-apostate-lawrence-wright 2022-12-29 The New Yorker en-US Haggis spent ten months trying to get Scientology to publicly denounce Prop 8, but Scientology remained silent and later said "Davis explained to Haggis that the church avoids taking overt political stands."Ortega Tony 2011-02-15 Scientology and Proposition 8: Debunking the Church Myth That It Stays Out of Politics https://www.villagevoice.com/2011/02/15/scientology-and-proposition-8-debunking-the-church-myth-that-it-stays-out-of-politics/ https://web.archive.org/web/20180913154854/https://www.villagevoice.com/2011/02/15/scientology-and-proposition-8-debunking-the-church-myth-that-it-stays-out-of-politics/ dead September 13, 2018 2022-12-29 The Village Voice going further to explain that because they are a non-profit with tax exempt status, they cannot take a political stance or risk losing that status.Spokesman: Scientologists aren't anti-gay https://www.today.com/popculture/spokesman-scientologists-aren-t-anti-gay-wbna33498755 2022-12-29 TODAY.com 28 October 2009 en Haggis resigned from Scientology after thirty-five years of membership and wrote in his resignation letter that "public sponsorship of Proposition 8, which succeeded in taking away the civil rights of gay and lesbian citizens of California—rights that were granted them by the Supreme Court of our state—is a stain on the integrity of our organization and a stain on us personally. Our public association with that hate-filled legislation shames us."2009-10-26 Film-maker Paul Haggis quits Scientology over gay rights stance http://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/oct/26/paul-haggis-scientology-prop-8 2022-12-29 The Guardian en "Whether You Like It or Not" advertisement In the months leading up to Election Day, Proposition 8 supporters released a commercial featuring San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom stating in a speech regarding same-sex marriage: "This door's wide open now. It's going to happen, whether you like it or not."http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/11/05/MN1B13S3D3.DTL https://web.archive.org/web/20090601132732/http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/11/05/MN1B13S3D3.DTL dead June 1, 2009 Newsom was central to same-sex marriage saga San Francisco Chronicle November 6, 2008 October 31, 2011 Erin Allday Some observers noted that polls shifted in favor of Proposition 8 following the release of the commercial; this, in turn, led to much speculation about Newsom's unwitting role in the passage of the amendment.Newsom seeks to get beyond Prop. 8 fiasco in quest to become governor https://web.archive.org/web/20090211015140/http://www.sacbee.com/295/story/1470639.html February 11, 2009 http://www.bpnews.net/BPnews.asp?ID=29277 'Historic' campaign scored Prop 8's win in California Bpnews.net November 6, 2008 October 31, 2011 https://web.archive.org/web/20110615025244/http://www.bpnews.net/BPnews.asp?ID=29277 June 15, 2011 https://www.newsweek.com/id/180047 Hoping That Left Is Right Darman, Johnatha Newsweek January 17, 2009 June 18, 2009 Opponents thumb|Official "Vote NO on Prop 8" logo Opponents argued that "the freedom to marry is fundamental to our society", that the California constitution "should guarantee the same freedom and rights to everyone", and that the proposition "mandates one set of rules for gay and lesbian couples and another set for everyone else". They also argued that "equality under the law is a fundamental constitutional guarantee" (see Equal Protection Clause). Equality for All was the lead organization opposed to Proposition 8.http://www.equalityforall.com/home Join No On Prop 8, Equality For All Equality for All July 31, 2008 https://web.archive.org/web/20100223031550/http://www.equalityforall.com/home February 23, 2010 They also ran the NoOnProp8.com campaign.http://www.noonprop8.com/home Vote No On Prop 8 September 21, 2008 https://web.archive.org/web/20080920024810/http://www.noonprop8.com/home September 20, 2008 As with the measure's proponents, opponents of the measure also included a number of political figures and religious organizations. Some non-partisan organizations and corporations, as well as the editorial boards of many of the state's major newspapers, also opposed the measure. Political figures thumb|San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom speaking at an anti-Proposition 8 rally on the Sproul Plaza steps at UC Berkeley Democratic presidential nominee and U.S. Senator Barack Obama stated that while he personally considered marriage to be between a man and woman,Obama Barack Obama Statement on Vote Against Constitutional Amendment to Ban Gay Marriage http://obama.senate.gov/press/060607-obama_statement_26/index.php Senate June 7, 2006 October 13, 2008 https://web.archive.org/web/20081208020010/http://obama.senate.gov/press/060607-obama_statement_26/index.php December 8, 2008 and supported civil unions that confer comparable rights rather than gay marriage,https://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/politics/2008/01/25/sot.obama.gay.marriage.wls Obama on same sex marriage January 25, 2008 CNN October 13, 2008 he opposed "divisive and discriminatory efforts to amend the California Constitution... the U.S. Constitution or those of other states".Rojas Aurelio Obama rejects proposed California gay marriage ban http://www.sacbee.com/111/story/1051404.html Sacramento Bee July 1, 2008 August 13, 2008 https://web.archive.org/web/20080731210556/http://www.sacbee.com/111/story/1051404.html July 31, 2008 Democratic vice-presidential candidate Joseph Biden also opposed the proposition.http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2008/10/20/entertainment/e174934D50.DTL&type=politics Biden says he'd oppose Calif. gay marriage ban San Francisco Chronicle October 20, 2008 October 21, 2008 https://web.archive.org/web/20081022235852/http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=%2Fn%2Fa%2F2008%2F10%2F20%2Fentertainment%2Fe174934D50.DTL&type=politics October 22, 2008 Republican California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger stated that although he opposed and twice vetoed legislative bills that would recognize same-sex marriage in California, he respected and would uphold the court's ruling and oppose the initiative and other attempts to amend the state's constitution.Schwarzenegger: No to Marriage Amendment Allison Hoffman Associated Press April 12, 2008 http://www.christianpost.com/article/20080412/31920_Schwarzenegger:_No_to_Marriage_Amendment_.htm https://web.archive.org/web/20080420040029/http://www.christianpost.com/article/20080412/31920_Schwarzenegger:_No_to_Marriage_Amendment_.htm April 20, 2008 http://www.gov.ca.gov/press-release/9610/ https://web.archive.org/web/20080517150436/http://gov.ca.gov/press-release/9610/ May 17, 2008 Gov. Schwarzenegger Issues Statement on Today's State Supreme Court Ruling May 15, 2008 Office of the Governor of California The U.S. House Speaker, California Representative (8th District), Nancy PelosiPelosi Statement on California State Supreme Court Ruling on Gay Marriage House Speaker Nancy Pelosi May 15, 2008 http://www.house.gov/pelosi/press/releases/May08/marriage.html https://web.archive.org/web/20080802174815/http://www.house.gov/pelosi/press/releases/May08/marriage.html August 2, 2008 along with other members of the California congressional delegation and both of California's U.S. senators, Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer, voiced their opposition to Proposition 8.http://ebar.com/news/article.php?sec=news&article=3320 Feinstein opposes Prop 8 Bay Area Reporter September 11, 2008 Also voicing their opposition were the Lieutenant Governor, State Controller John Chiang, former governor and Attorney General Jerry Brown, 42 of 80 members of the state assembly, half of the state senators, and the mayors of San Francisco, Los Angeles, and San Diego: Gavin Newsom, Antonio Villaraigosa, and Jerry Sanders, respectively.http://ebar.com/news/article.php?sec=news&article=3312 Feinstein silent on Prop 8 Hemmelgarn Seth September 11, 2008 Bay Area Reporter September 17, 2008https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yPh0PQ89n6Y Gavin Newsom Speaks on Prop 8 YouTube September 17, 2008https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rfea8iEGNw San Diego Mayor Stands Up For Marriage Equality YouTube October 2, 2008http://digital.library.ucla.edu/websites/2008_993_109/about/who-opposes-prop-8/index.htm Who Opposes Prop 8? No On 8, Equality for All August 1, 2013 January 24, 2016 https://web.archive.org/web/20160124004127/http://digital.library.ucla.edu/websites/2008_993_109/about/who-opposes-prop-8/index.htm Religious organizations All six Episcopal diocesan bishops in California jointly issued a statement opposing Proposition 8 on September 10, 2008.California's top Episcopal bishops oppose gay marriage ban https://www.latimes.com/news/local/politics/cal/la-me-gaymarriage11-2008sep11,0,7646017.story Los Angeles Times September 11, 2008 Duke Helfand Southern California's largest collection of rabbis, the Board of Rabbis of Southern California, voted to oppose Proposition 8.https://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-briefs27-2008sep27,0,1387683.story Southern California rabbi board opposes gay marriage ban Los Angeles Times September 27, 2008 March 12, 2021 Other Jewish groups who opposed Proposition 8 include Jewish Mosaic,Drinkwater Gregg Speaking out for love, justice and the freedom to marry Jewish Mosaic October 20, 2008 http://www.jewishmosaic.org/page/load_page/142 October 25, 2008 https://web.archive.org/web/20090214094932/http://www.jewishmosaic.org/page/load_page/142 February 14, 2009 the American Jewish Committee, Progressive Jewish Alliance, National Council of Jewish Women, and the Anti-Defamation League (ADL). The ADL filed amicus briefs urging the Supreme Court of California, Ninth Circuit, and the Supreme Court to invalidate Prop 8.http://38.106.4.56/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentID=1228 Brief Of Amici Curiae Anti-Defamation League Et Al. In Support Of Respondents https://web.archive.org/web/20130307154233/http://38.106.4.56/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentID=1228 2013-03-07 2013-11-01 Los Angeles Jews were more opposed to Prop 8 than any other religious group or ethnic group in the city. Seventy-eight percent of surveyed Jewish Angelenos voted against the measure while only 8% supported the measure; the remainder declined to respond.http://jta.org/news/article/2008/11/09/1000851/most-la-jews-voted-against-same-sex-ban Most L.A. Jews voted against same-sex ban Jewish Telegraphic Agency November 9, 2008 https://web.archive.org/web/20120825114630/http://jta.org/news/article/2008/11/09/1000851/most-la-jews-voted-against-same-sex-ban August 25, 2012 The legislative ministry of the Unitarian Universalists opposed Proposition 8, and organized phone banks toward defeating the measure. Deakin Michelle Bates Unitarian Universalists work to preserve gay marriage in Calif. UUWorld October 20, 2008 https://www.uuworld.org/news/articles/121067.shtml December 24, 2008 They saw opposition to the proposition as a civil rights and social justice issue and their actions against it as a continuation of their previous works in civil rights. In addition, the California Council of Churches urged the "immediate removal of Proposition 8"—saying that it infringes on the freedom of religion for churches who wish to bless same-sex unions.http://www.nclrights.org/site/DocServer/CACouncilofChurchesPR.pdf CA Council of Churches Condemn Court Decision CA Council of Churches May 26, 2009 August 1, 2013 https://web.archive.org/web/20120112100233/http://www.nclrights.org/site/DocServer/CACouncilofChurchesPR.pdf January 12, 2012 Others The League of Women Voters of California opposed Proposition 8 because "no person or group should suffer legal, economic or administrative discrimination".http://ca.lwv.org/action/prop0811/prop8.html Vote No on Proposition 8 League of Women Voters of California https://web.archive.org/web/20081012073424/http://ca.lwv.org/action/prop0811/prop8.html 2008-10-12 Additionally, all but two of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People's local chapters in California and NAACP national chairman Julian Bond and President Benjamin Jealous opposed Proposition 8.http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/07/16/MNI318P67K.DTL https://web.archive.org/web/20090720230212/http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/07/16/MNI318P67K.DTL dead July 20, 2009 NAACP weighs support of gays who want to marry San Francisco Chronicle Garofoli, Joe June 16, 2009 June 17, 2009 Amnesty International also condemned Proposition 8, saying that "states should never withhold rights based on minority status".http://news.prnewswire.com/DisplayReleaseContent.aspx?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/03-03-2009/0004982118&EDATE= Amnesty International Urges California Supreme Court to Overturn Prop 8 and Restore Marriage Equality Newswire March 4, 2009 https://web.archive.org/web/20090522040604/http://news.prnewswire.com/DisplayReleaseContent.aspx?ACCT=104 May 22, 2009 A coalition of Silicon Valley executives urged a 'No' vote on Proposition 8.Silicon Valley Stands United Against Prop. 8 https://techcrunch.com/2008/10/30/silicon-valley-stands-united-against-prop-8/ TechCrunch October 31, 2008 October 30, 2008 Google officially opposed Proposition 8 "as an issue of equality", and its founders donated $140,000 to the No on 8 campaign.Our position on California's No on 8 campaign https://googleblog.blogspot.com/2008/09/our-position-on-californias-no-on-8.html September 26, 2008 September 29, 2008Google, Apple Openly Support Fight Against 'Proposition 8' https://www.osnews.com/story/20432/Google_Apple_Openly_Support_Fight_Against_Proposition_8_/ October 25, 2008 July 11, 2013Apple to oppose anti-gay marriage ballot question http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-10074793-37.html October 24, 2008 October 24, 2008 March 10, 2012 https://web.archive.org/web/20120310201429/http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-10074793-37.html Apple Inc. also opposed Proposition 8 as a "fundamental" civil rights issue, and donated $100,000 to the No on 8 campaign. Quinn Michelle Apple donates $100,000 to fight same-sex marriage ban Los Angeles Times October 24, 2008 https://latimesblogs.latimes.com/technology/2008/10/apple-against-t.html?cid=136241195 Biotech leaders warned of potential damage to the state's $73 billion industry, citing Massachusetts as a top competitor for employees.Proposition 8 would blunt biotech edge, execs say http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/business/20081029-9999-1b29prop8.html San Diego Union-Tribune Terri Somers October 29, 2008 October 29, 2008 https://web.archive.org/web/20081101100502/http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/business/20081029-9999-1b29prop8.html November 1, 2008 Many members of the entertainment industry were opposed to Proposition 8.Hollywood comes out in support of gay marriage Derrik Lang http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iiQ9C0VDMLFaIonfk5s-p2cz2pfQD93VSANO0 October 22, 2008 October 27, 2008 https://web.archive.org/web/20081027085626/http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iiQ9C0VDMLFaIonfk5s-p2cz2pfQD93VSANO0 October 27, 2008 Actor Tom Hanks, a strong supporter of same-sex marriage, was extremely outspoken about his opposition to the bill. Brad Pitt and Steven Spielberg each donated different amounts of money to the opposition campaign "No on 8".https://uk.eonline.com/uberblog/b30446_Spielberg_Makes_Like_Pitt__Supports_Same_Sex_Marriage.html Spielberg Makes Like Pitt, Supports Same-Sex Marriage—E! Online Uk.eonline.com September 23, 2008 October 31, 2011 In 2010, the documentary film 8: The Mormon Proposition premiered to sell-out audiences at the Sundance Film Festival. The Los Angeles Unified School District Board of Education voted unanimously for a resolution to oppose Proposition 8.http://blogs.laweekly.com/ladaily/queer-town/queer-town-1/ LA Unified Opposes Prop. 8 LA Weekly September 10, 2008 October 13, 2008 https://web.archive.org/web/20080924184022/http://blogs.laweekly.com/ladaily/queer-town/queer-town-1/ September 24, 2008 The California Teachers Association donated one million dollars to fight Proposition 8.https://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-teachers17-2008oct17,0,6308701.story Teachers Union Donates $1 Million to Oppose Proposition 8 Los Angeles Times October 17, 2008 October 17, 2008 Evelyn Larrubia Chancellor Robert Birgeneau of UC Berkeley urged a vote against the measure, claiming a likely threat to California's academic competitiveness if Proposition 8 is passed.Chancellor Birgeneau informs campus of likely impacts of Proposition 8 http://berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2008/10/22_propeight.shtml October 22, 2008 October 29, 2008 Newspaper editorials All ten of the state's largest newspapers editorialized against Proposition 8, including the Los Angeles Times,Reneging on a right https://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-ed-marriage8-2008aug08%2C0%2C1229155.story Los Angeles Times August 8, 2008 September 29, 2008 and the San Francisco Chronicle.Californians should reject Proposition 8 http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/10/01/ED7T1390OF.DTL&hw=Proposition+section%3Ded+in&sn=022&sc=554 https://web.archive.org/web/20090215044150/http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/10/01/ED7T1390OF.DTL&hw=Proposition+section%3Ded+in&sn=022&sc=554 dead February 15, 2009 San Francisco Chronicle October 1, 2008 October 2, 2008Gay marriage right should not be repealed http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20080918/news_lz1ed18top.html San Diego Union-Tribune September 18, 2008 September 29, 2008 https://web.archive.org/web/20080921013652/http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20080918/news_lz1ed18top.html September 21, 2008California Prop. 8 Editorial: Intrusion into marriage should be even-handed http://www.ocregister.com/articles/marriage-sex-protection-2174926-california-state The Orange County Register October 1, 2008 October 2, 2008 https://web.archive.org/web/20081007165353/http://www.ocregister.com/articles/marriage-sex-protection-2174926-california-state October 7, 2008http://www.sacbee.com/110/story/1299709-p3.html Endorsements '08: Say 'No' to all propositions except 11 October 9, 2008 October 9, 2008 Sacramento Bee https://web.archive.org/web/20081014203411/http://www.sacbee.com/110/story/1299709-p3.html October 14, 2008 http://www.mercurynews.com/opinion/ci_10229683 San Jose Mercury News Editorial: Initiative against gay marriage must be defeated August 17, 2008 September 29, 2008http://www.contracostatimes.com/opinion/ci_10755791 Times recommendations on California propositions Contra Costa Times October 19, 2008 October 20, 2008http://www.pe.com/elections/2008/oped/editorials/stories/PE_OpEd_Opinion_S_op_28_ed_prop8_1_elx.97ff31.html No on 8 September 27, 2008 October 20, 2008 The Press-Enterprise May 2026http://www.fresnobee.com/opinion/story/950392.html No on Prop. 8 The Fresno Bee October 21, 2008 October 21, 2008 https://web.archive.org/web/20081024094045/http://www.fresnobee.com/opinion/story/950392.html October 24, 2008 http://www.dailynews.com/editorial/ci_10720727 No on Prop. 8 Daily News October 20, 2008 October 21, 2008 https://web.archive.org/web/20081017192316/http://www.dailynews.com/editorial/ci_10720727 October 17, 2008 mdy-all Other papers which editorialized in opposition include The New York Times,Preserving California's Constitution https://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/29/opinion/29mon3.html The New York Times September 28, 2008 September 29, 2008 La Opinión (Los Angeles),http://www.impre.com/laopinion/opinion/editorial/2008/10/9/una-propuesta-innecesaria-86131-1.html Una propuesta innecesaria La Opinión es October 9, 2008 October 21, 2008 October 23, 2008 https://web.archive.org/web/20081023030212/http://www.impre.com/laopinion/opinion/editorial/2008/10/9/una-propuesta-innecesaria-86131-1.html and The Bakersfield Californian.http://www.bakersfield.com/opinion/editorials/story/581251.html Vote no on Proposition 8 The Bakersfield Californian October 15, 2008 October 28, 2008 https://web.archive.org/web/20081017165726/http://www.bakersfield.com/opinion/editorials/story/581251.html October 17, 2008 Actions against supporters and opponents Protests against Proposition 8 supporters November 15, 2008 anti-Proposition 8 protests After the election, a number of protests were held against the referendum's passing. These included candlelight vigils outside organizations such as LDS churches that promoted the proposition. Anti-Prop 8 demonstrators protest near Mormon temple Sean Maher Oakland Tribune http://www.insidebayarea.com/ci_10943059 December 24, 2008 November 10, 2008 LDS moms hold vigil against Prop. 8 Budy Blankenfeld ABC4 http://www.abc4.com/content/news/top%20stories/story/LDS-moms-hold-vigil-against-Prop-8/E81cQC526UaEWdX1G9N40A.cspx December 24, 2008 November 2, 2008 https://web.archive.org/web/20110617012731/http://www.abc4.com/content/news/top%20stories/story/LDS-moms-hold-vigil-against-Prop-8/E81cQC526UaEWdX1G9N40A.cspx 2011-06-17 Rallies against the amendment took place in California and across the country, with participants numbering in thousands.https://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/16/us/16protest.html Across U.S., Big Rallies for Same-Sex Marriage Jesse McKinley 15 November 2008 NYTimes.com The New York Timeshttp://wbztv.com/local/gay.marriage.protest.2.865418.html wbztv.com: 4,000 In Boston Protest Calif. Gay Marriage Ban https://web.archive.org/web/20100228165230/http://wbztv.com/local/gay.marriage.protest.2.865418.html February 28, 2010 http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/latestnews/stories/111608dnmetprop8protest.1b72a49ee.html dallasnews.com: 1,200 protest California's gay-marriage ban at Dallas City Hall https://web.archive.org/web/20090824203517/http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/latestnews/stories/111608dnmetprop8protest.1b72a49ee.html August 24, 2009 http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/orange/orl-gayprotest1508nov15,0,4193502.story https://web.archive.org/web/20110810201828/http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2008-11-15/news/gayprotest15_1_same-sex-marriage-marriage-in-florida-protest 2011-08-10 Orland Sentinel: 'National Day of Protest' of gay-marriage bans includes Orlando, 85 other cities Gammage Jeff Gay-rights rally in Phila. part of nationwide protest https://www.inquirer.com/philly/news/local/20081116_Gay-rights_rally_in_Phila__part_of_nationwide_protest.html 2021-01-16 www.inquirer.com 16 November 2008 en-UShttp://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/11/15/BAIA145AQ9.DTL San Francisco Chronicle: Bay Area demonstrations condemn Prop. 8 The San Francisco Chronicle https://web.archive.org/web/20120127161426/http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=%2Fc%2Fa%2F2008%2F11%2F15%2FBAIA145AQ9.DTL January 27, 2012 Boycotts were also a feature of public response to the outcome of the election. LGBTQ rights groups published lists of donors to the Yes on 8 campaign and organized boycotts of individuals or organizations who had promoted or donated to it. Protests, boycotts erupt in the wake of Prop. 8's passage Mary Anne Ostrom The Mercury News https://www.mercurynews.com/ci_10978482 November 13, 2008 Liberal Hollywood ponders next step in fight for same-sex marriage Rachel Abramowitz Los Angeles Times https://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/front/la-et-shunned23-2008nov23,0,5732864.story November 23, 2008 Same-Sex Activists Target Sundance Robert Hofler Variety https://www.variety.com/index.asp?layout=festivals&jump=story&id=2470&articleid=VR1117996044&cs=1 November 17, 2008 Targets of the boycotts included the Sundance Film Festival in Utah, El Coyote Cafe, California Musical Theatre, and the Manchester Grand Hyatt Hotel. https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB123033766467736451 The Wall Street Journal Jim Carlton Gay Activists Boycott Backers of Prop 8 December 27, 2008 Ainsworth Bill Gay rights groups to boycott Manchester Grand Hyatt San Diego Union Tribune July 10, 2008 http://weblog.signonsandiego.com/news/metro/20080710-9999-1m10boycott.html June 16, 2009 https://web.archive.org/web/20090324033153/http://weblog.signonsandiego.com/news/metro/20080710-9999-1m10boycott.html March 24, 2009 Some supporters of Proposition 8 reported receiving death threats, some of which claimed to be "stemming from Prop 8"."Prop 8 Threat: Fresno Police close to Arrest", by Andres Araiza, KFSN-TV30/Fresno, October 31, 2008"Prop 8 Death Threats", by Amanda Perez, KFSN-TV30/Fresno, October 31, 2008 Some LDS churches were vandalized with spray paint.http://www.news10.net/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=50266 Prop 8 Protesting Turns Ugly November 10, 2008 April 4, 2009 https://web.archive.org/web/20110608063501/http://www.news10.net/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=50266 2011-06-08Radical Gay Activist Group Plans More Disruptions Chicago Tribune http://archives.chicagotribune.com/2008/nov/20/news/chi-ap-mi-gayactivistprotes November 20, 2008 https://web.archive.org/web/20091116125804/http://archives.chicagotribune.com/2008/nov/20/news/chi-ap-mi-gayactivistprotes November 16, 2009 Fresno-area supporters of gay marriage were also harassed; "No On 8" signs at the Clovis Unitarian Universalist Church were torn up, with Reverend Bryan Jessup alleging that his church experienced vandalism "every night". Santa Clara County Deputy District Attorney (DDA) Jay Boyarsky attributed a surge in anti-gay hate crimes, from 3 in 2007 to 14 in 2008, to controversy over Proposition 8.http://docs.newsbank.com/openurl?ctx_ver=z39.88-2004&rft_id=info:sid/iw.newsbank.com:AWNB:SJMB&rft_val_format=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rft_dat=126FC8991C109DB8&svc_dat=InfoWeb:aggregated5&req_dat=0FB3382EE6AD1E46 Surge in anti-gay hate crime cases San Jose Mercury News March 16, 2009 March 16, 2009 Tracey Kaplan Pre-decision opinion polls Various opinion polls were conducted to estimate the outcome of the proposition. Those margins with differences less than their margins of error are marked as "n.s.", meaning not significant (see statistical significance). Those margins considered statistically significant are indicated with the percentage points and the side favored in the poll, as either "pro" for in favor of the proposition's passage (e.g., 1% pro), or "con" for against its passage (e.g., 1% con). According to the director of the Field Poll, the discrepancy between the pre-election polls and ballot results is because "regular church-goers ... were more prone than other voters to be influenced by last-minute appeals to conform to orthodox church positions when voting on a progressive social issue like same-sex marriage."http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/11/10/EDGQ140F5R.DTL https://web.archive.org/web/20081113110251/http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/11/10/EDGQ140F5R.DTL dead November 13, 2008 Why Prop. 8 confounded pre-election pollsters San Francisco Chronicle November 10, 2008 November 12, 2008 Mark DiCamillo Date of opinion pollConducted bySample size(likely voters)In favorAgainstUndecidedMarginMargin of error October 29–31, 2008https://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=1c4ececc-7c3c-490c-8f35-13341be85e1e Proposition 8, on Marriage, Still in Doubt SurveyUSA November 1, 2008 November 2, 2008 SurveyUSA 637 47% 50% left 3% n.s. ±4% October 18–28, 2008https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Prop-8-still-trails-but-margin-narrows-3188490.php Prop. 8 still trails, but margin narrows The Field Poll October 22, 2008 October 23, 2008 John Wildermuth The Field Poll 966 44% 49% left 7% 5% con ±3.3% October 12–19, 2008https://www.ppic.org/publication/ppic-statewide-survey-californians-and-their-government-october-2008/ Californians & Their Government — PPIC Survey Public Policy Institute of California October 22, 2008 October 23, 2008 Public Policy Institute of California 1,186 44% 52% left 4% 8% con ±3% October 15–16, 2008https://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=0d4fd538-5834-4c18-98c8-6e58da254976 California Prop 8 Remains a Fierce Fight That Could Be Decided Either Way By Handful of Votes SurveyUSA October 17, 2008 October 17, 2008 SurveyUSA 615 48% left 45% 7% n.s. ±4% October 4–5, 2008http://cbs5.com/politics/proposition.8.poll.2.834082.html Young Voters Lead Prop 8 Support Shift CBS 5 local October 6, 2008 October 7, 2008 https://web.archive.org/web/20081007165744/http://cbs5.com/politics/proposition.8.poll.2.834082.html October 7, 2008 https://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=b46ce159-115e-4f44-8be2-ce9b8eca657e California Proposition 8 Too Close To Call SurveyUSA October 6, 2008 October 7, 2008 SurveyUSA 670 47% left 42% 10% 5% pro ±3.9% September 23–24, 2008https://abc30.com/archive/6413879/ Action News poll ABC 30 local September 26, 2008 September 26, 2008 live https://web.archive.org/web/20110604054707/http://abclocal.go.com/kfsn/story?section=news%2Fpolitics&id=6413879 June 4, 2011https://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=5b550e83-b6dc-4554-a125-a795e5dd7a6c California Proposition 8 Could Go Either Way SurveyUSA September 25, 2008 September 26, 2008 SurveyUSA 661 44% 49% left 8% 5% con ±3.9% September 9–16, 2008Wildermuth, John Poll: Same-sex marriage ban not wooing voters San Francisco Chronicle B2 September 25, 2008 https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Poll-Same-sex-marriage-ban-not-wooing-voters-3383551.php Public Policy Institute of California 1,157 41% 55% left 4% 14% con ±3% September 5–14, 2008http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/09/18/BATM12VSRA.DTL&hw=Proposition+field+poll&sn=005&sc=072 https://web.archive.org/web/20090215052223/http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/09/18/BATM12VSRA.DTL&hw=Proposition+field+poll&sn=005&sc=072 dead February 15, 2009 Opposition to same-sex marriage ban grows San Francisco Chronicle September 18, 2008 October 23, 2008 Carrie Sturrock The Field Poll 830 38% 55% left 7% 17% con ±3.5% August 12–19, 2008https://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-gaymarriage28-2008aug28,0,6444457.story Most oppose bid to ban gay marriage in California, poll finds Los Angeles Times August 27, 2008 August 30, 2008 Jessica Garrisonhttps://www.ppic.org/publication/ppic-statewide-survey-californians-and-their-government-January-2008/ Californians & their government Public Policy Institute of California August 27, 2008 March 12, 2021 Public Policy Institute of California 1,047 40% 54% left 6% 14% con ±3% July 8–14, 2008http://field.com/fieldpollonline/subscribers/Rls2278.pdf Release #2278 The Field Poll July 18, 2008 October 22, 2008 https://web.archive.org/web/20081029064046/http://field.com/fieldpollonline/subscribers/Rls2278.pdf October 29, 2008 The Field Poll 672 42% 51% left 7% 9% con ±3.9% May 17–26, 2008http://www.sacbee.com/111/story/970055.html Field Poll: Majority of Californians now support gay marriage Sacramento Bee May 28, 2008 August 1, 2008 https://web.archive.org/web/20080529122417/http://www.sacbee.com/111/story/970055.html May 29, 2008 The Field Poll 1,052 42% 51% left 7% 9% con ±3.2% May 22, 2008https://www.latimes.com/news/custom/timespoll/la-me-poll23-2008may23,0,5490260.story Times Poll: Californians narrowly reject gay marriage Los Angeles Times May 23, 2008 August 1, 2008 Cathleen Decker Los Angeles Times/KTLA 705 54% left 35% 11% 19% pro ±4% Results 330px|thumb|right| County results For #47729E 70%–80% 1px #AAAAAA solid #7D9CBB 60%–70% 1px #AAAAAA solid #B6C8D9 50%–60% 1px #AAAAAA solid Against #8B8B54 70%–80% 1px #AAAAAA solid #BCBC83 60%–70% 1px #AAAAAA solid #DEDEBD 50%–60% 1px #AAAAAA solid Proposition 8 7001084 13402566 6401482 79.42 340611 Proposition 8 Yes 7,001,084 #01387b #fff No 6,401,482 #feda00 #000 thumb|A paper ballot with a vote cast against Prop 8 On the early morning hours of November 5, 2008, KGO-TV reported, with 92% of all precincts reporting, and The Associated Press (AP) reported, with 95% of all precincts reporting, that Proposition 8 had passed. According to the AP, some provisional and absentee ballots were yet to be counted, but based on trends and the locations of outstanding votes, Proposition 8's margin of support was secure.https://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/06/world/americas/06iht-06ballot.17571248.html California voters ban gay marriage Randal C. Archibold Abby Goodnough October 6, 2008 NYTimes.comSame-sex marriage ban leads, opponents don't concedehttps://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna27576148 'The Rachel Maddow Show'for Wednesday, November 5, 2008 November 6, 2008 NBC Newshttps://www.deseret.com/2008/11/5/20380483/prop-8-wins-legal-challenges-poised/ Prop. 8 wins; legal challenges poised November 5, 2008 Deseret Newshttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LK4zbiR90DE Prop 8 Passes in California - Bans Gay Marriage November 5, 2008 YouTube Amending the California Constitution by voter initiative requires a simple majority to be enacted.http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/.const/.article_18 Article 18 Amending and Revising the Constitution November 26, 2008 Legislative Counsel of California https://web.archive.org/web/20081210120948/http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/.const/.article_18 December 10, 2008 Edison/Mitofsky conducted an exit poll on behalf of the National Election Pool which is the only source of data on voter demographics in California in the 2008 election.https://edition.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/results/polls/#val=CAI01p1 CNN 2008 Exit Polls, Page 1 November 13, 2008https://edition.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/results/polls/#CAI01p2 CNN 2008 Exit Polls, Page 2 November 13, 2008 The statistical trends from the exit poll of 2,240 voters suggested that an array of voters came out both in opposition to and in support of Proposition 8, with no single demographic group making up most of either the Yes or No vote. The National Election Pool poll showed that support for Proposition 8 was strong amongst African American voters, interviewed in the exit poll with 70% in favor, more than any other racial group.http://www.ktvu.com/news/news/exit-poll-shows-blacks-hispanics-overwhelmingly-ba/nKXyL/ Exit Poll Shows Blacks, Hispanics Overwhelmingly Backed Prop. 8 November 5, 2008 KTVU March 29, 2012 https://web.archive.org/web/20120917230950/http://www.ktvu.com/news/news/exit-poll-shows-blacks-hispanics-overwhelmingly-ba/nKXyL/ September 17, 2012 Their support was considered crucial to the proposition's passing, since African Americans made up an unusually larger percentage of voters that year, due to the presence of Barack Obama on the ballot.https://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-timelinegaymarriage-2008nov06,0,496938.story Focused beyond marriage Los Angeles Times 2008-11-06 2013-11-01 Dan Morain Jessica Garrison Polls by both the Associated Press and CNN mirrored this data, reporting support among black voters to be at 70%http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2008/11/70-of-african-a.html 70% of African Americans backed Prop. 8, exit poll finds - latimes.com Latimesblogs.latimes.com 2008-11-05 2013-11-01 and 75%,https://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/results/polls/#val=CAI01p1 Local Exit Polls—Election Center 2008—Elections & Politics from CNN 2013-11-01 respectively. A later study by the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force (NGLTF), examining the black vote only from five counties within the state, suggested that black support was closer to 58%.http://www.thetaskforce.org/downloads/issues/egan_sherrill_prop8_1_6_09.pdf California's Prop 8 2009-12-22 https://web.archive.org/web/20100107025954/http://www.thetaskforce.org/downloads/issues/egan_sherrill_prop8_1_6_09.pdf 2010-01-07https://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/Black-support-for-Prop-8-called-exaggeration-3177138.php Black support for Prop 8 called exaggeration John Wildermuth January 7, 2009 The San Francisco Chronicle Hispanic and Latino voters also voted for Proposition 8.Karl Vick Ashley Surdin Most of California's Black Voters Backed Gay Marriage Ban https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/11/06/AR2008110603880.html The Washington Post District of Columbia 7 November 2008 11 April 2017 Marcus Wohlsen Associated Press Blacks, Latinos helped Prop. 8, exit polls say http://legacy.sandiegouniontribune.com/uniontrib/20081106/news_1n6exit.html San Diego Union-Tribune San Diego 6 November 2008 11 April 2017 https://web.archive.org/web/20170412143227/http://legacy.sandiegouniontribune.com/uniontrib/20081106/news_1n6exit.html 12 April 2017 http://politics.as.nyu.edu/docs/IO/4819/marriagedivides.pdf California's Proposition 8 and America's Racial and Ethnic Divides on Same-Sex Marriage Patrick J. Egan Kenneth Sherrill January 2010 The Wilf Family Department of Politics New York University 11 April 2017 Those who described themselves as religious were the strongest supporters of Prop 8.https://www.huffpost.com/entry/faith-not-race-the-big-fa_b_156780 Ridley John Faith, Not Race, The Big Factor in Prop 8 Vote February 9, 2009 Huffpost March 12, 2021 According to the NGLTF study, self-identified Catholics and Protestants supported Prop 8 by measures of 55% and 66%, respectively,https://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/results/polls/#val=CAI01p2 Local Exit Polls—Election Center 2008—Elections & Politics from CNN 2013-11-01 while Jews overwhelmingly opposed it, with support at only 17%.http://www.thetaskforce.org/downloads/issues/egan_sherrill_prop8_1_6_09.pdf https://web.archive.org/web/20100107025954/http://www.thetaskforce.org/downloads/issues/egan_sherrill_prop8_1_6_09.pdf 2010-01-07 California's Proposition 8: What Happened, and What Does the Future Hold? 2013-11-01http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2008/11/la-jews-overwhe.html L.A. Jews overwhelmingly opposed Prop. 8, exit poll finds - latimes.com Latimesblogs.latimes.com 2008-11-09 2013-11-01 Young voters were more likely to have voted against the ballot measure than older voters, while Republicans were more likely to have supported the measure than were Democrats.Sacbee.com, California election exit poll data. Retrieved August 20, 2009 County breakdown +Breakdown of voting by countyhttp://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/sov/2008-general/sov_complete.pdf Statement of Vote: 2008 General Election California Secretary of State December 13, 2008 June 26, 2013 https://web.archive.org/web/20130506165548/http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/sov/2008-general/sov_complete.pdf May 6, 2013 County Yes Votes No VotesKern75.3%175,16724.7%57,496Tulare75.1%78,57824.9%26,113Modoc74.2%3,27925.8%1,142Kings73.7%25,82126.3%9,244Madera73.5%30,90626.5%11,193Glenn73.3%7,23526.7%2,644Tehama72.8%17,77727.2%6,675Colusa71.6%4,55628.4%1,815Lassen71.3%8,02128.7%3,241Merced70.8%44,80029.2%18,520Sutter70.4%23,03229.6%9,707Shasta69.7%55,69830.3%24,224Imperial69.7%27,04830.3%11,783Fresno68.7%185,99331.3%83,122Stanislaus67.9%108,98832.1%51,598Yuba67.6%14,32332.4%6,868San Bernardino66.8%404,76233.2%202,227San Joaquin65.5%135,72834.5%71,747Riverside64.7%417,13335.3%228,449Sierra64.2%1,27335.8%711Amador64.0%11,94536.0%6,725Calaveras63.9%14,62436.1%8,588Tuolumne62.6%16,96437.4%10,163Mariposa62.1%5,96137.9%3,640Inyo60.6%5,11639.4%3,334Del Norte60.1%5,65839.9%3,770Siskiyou60.0%12,66840.0%8,475Plumas60.0%6,57640.0%4,401Placer59.8%102,97740.2%69,444El Dorado58.3%53,83741.7%38,534Orange57.7%659,03742.3%484,015Trinity56.2%3,56343.8%2,785Butte56.1%54,82243.9%43,045Solano55.9%89,29244.1%70,680San Benito54.8%10,65745.2%8,794Sacramento53.9%289,37846.1%248,444San Diego53.8%655,62546.2%565,054Ventura52.9%178,71947.1%159,284Lake52.0%13,03648.0%12,080San Luis Obispo51.1%67,30448.9%64,555Los Angeles50.1%1,624,67249.9%1,622,287Nevada50.1%27,61749.9%27,614Monterey48.4%62,25151.6%66,191Santa Barbara46.4%80,11753.6%92,305Contra Costa44.6%198,71355.4%246,753Napa44.4%26,22755.6%32,742Mono44.2%2,42555.8%3,050Santa Clara44.2%291,34755.8%367,053Alpine43.6%29356.4%379Yolo41.3%32,81656.4%46,537Humboldt39.9%25,29660.1%37,963San Mateo38.2%114,69561.8%185,127Alameda38.0%232,92362.0%378,692Mendocino36.8%14,64963.2%25,072Sonoma33.5%76,14366.5%150,763Santa Cruz28.7%36,16371.3%89,793Marin24.9%34,32475.1%103,341San Francisco24.8%92,53675.2%280,491 City breakdown Breakdown of voting by city +Official outcome by city and unincorporated areas of counties, of which Yes won 370 and No won 166https://elections.cdn.sos.ca.gov/sov/2008-general/ssov/ssov-complete.pdf Supplement to Statement of Vote California Secretary of State March 31, 2026 City County Yes No Margin Total votes Swing from 2008 presidential(McCain to "Yes")% # % # % # % Alameda Alameda 11,075 31.61% 23,957 68.39% -12,882 -36.77% 35,032 20.06% Albany 1,497 17.35% 7,133 82.65% -5,636 -65.31% 8,630 13.56% Berkeley 8,114 12.61% 56,209 87.39% -48,095 -74.77% 64,323 12.82% Dublin 7,463 44.61% 9,265 55.39% -1,802 -10.77% 16,728 22.90% Emeryville 1,033 22.48% 3,563 77.52% -2,530 -55.05% 4,596 25.84% Fremont 36,825 49.98% 36,858 50.02% -33 -0.04% 73,683 43.94% Hayward 20,696 49.55% 21,071 50.45% -375 -0.90% 41,767 56.77% Livermore 18,413 49.10% 19,090 50.90% -677 -1.81% 37,503 14.57% Newark 7,218 48.99% 7,516 51.01% -298 -2.02% 14,734 44.88% Oakland 49,928 30.65% 112,946 69.35% -63,018 -38.69% 162,874 45.54% Piedmont 1,529 21.53% 5,572 78.47% -4,043 -56.94% 7,101 0.58% Pleasanton 15,752 45.81% 18,637 54.19% -2,885 -8.39% 34,389 13.62% San Leandro 15,385 48.12% 16,586 51.88% -1,201 -3.76% 31,971 49.09% Union City 11,607 51.68% 10,854 48.32% 753 3.35% 22,461 57.22% Unincorporated area 26,388 47.27% 29,435 52.73% -3,047 -5.46% 55,823 37.09% Unincorporated area Alpine 293 43.60% 379 56.40% -86 -12.80% 672 11.80% Amador City Amador 54 45.76% 64 54.24% -10 -8.47% 118 4.97% Ione 1,241 70.87% 510 29.13% 731 41.75% 1,751 14.14% Jackson 1,407 64.36% 779 35.64% 628 28.73% 2,186 18.83% Plymouth 322 68.51% 148 31.49% 174 37.02% 470 13.35% Sutter Creek 812 56.15% 634 43.85% 178 12.31% 1,446 13.07% Unincorporated area 8,109 63.86% 4,590 36.14% 3,519 27.71% 12,699 12.35% Biggs Butte 427 72.62% 161 27.38% 266 45.24% 588 28.88% Chico 16,265 42.35% 22,145 57.65% -5,880 -15.31% 38,410 9.96% Gridley 1,446 72.99% 535 27.01% 911 45.99% 1,981 44.48% Oroville 2,798 63.79% 1,588 36.21% 1,210 27.59% 4,386 23.09% Paradise 8,757 64.18% 4,887 35.82% 3,870 28.36% 13,644 19.46% Unincorporated area 25,129 64.67% 13,729 35.33% 11,400 29.34% 38,858 14.17% Angels Calaveras 1,166 61.11% 742 38.89% 424 22.22% 1,908 11.77% Unincorporated area 13,458 63.17% 7,846 36.83% 5,612 26.34% 21,304 13.12% Colusa Colusa 1,314 69.12% 587 30.88% 727 38.24% 1,901 22.93% Williams 634 73.21% 232 26.79% 402 46.42% 866 63.73% Unincorporated area 2,608 72.36% 996 27.64% 1,612 44.73% 3,604 16.43% Antioch Contra Costa 19,368 55.47% 15,547 44.53% 3,821 10.94% 34,915 50.35% Brentwood 11,770 58.05% 8,506 41.95% 3,264 16.10% 20,276 31.55% Clayton 3,244 49.68% 3,286 50.32% -42 -0.64% 6,530 10.95% Concord 21,733 44.93% 26,635 55.07% -4,902 -10.13% 48,368 24.88% Danville 11,046 45.12% 13,436 54.88% -2,390 -9.76% 24,482 1.79% El Cerrito 2,977 23.73% 9,568 76.27% -6,591 -52.54% 12,545 20.21% Hercules 5,286 51.32% 5,014 48.68% 272 2.64% 10,300 58.42% Lafayette 4,573 30.91% 10,222 69.09% -5,649 -38.18% 14,795 -1.31% Martinez 7,363 39.22% 11,411 60.78% -4,048 -21.56% 18,774 16.88% Moraga 3,554 38.35% 5,713 61.65% -2,159 -23.30% 9,267 4.37% Oakley 6,451 57.19% 4,828 42.81% 1,623 14.39% 11,279 38.55% Orinda 3,459 30.16% 8,010 69.84% -4,551 -39.68% 11,469 -3.03% Pinole 3,973 47.54% 4,384 52.46% -411 -4.92% 8,357 41.31% Pittsburg 10,489 55.28% 8,487 44.72% 2,002 10.55% 18,976 66.89% Pleasant Hill 6,022 35.85% 10,777 64.15% -4,755 -28.31% 16,799 12.80% Richmond 14,493 43.17% 19,077 56.83% -4,584 -13.66% 33,570 63.76% San Pablo 3,261 51.97% 3,014 48.03% 247 3.94% 6,275 77.83% San Ramon 13,384 45.49% 16,038 54.51% -2,654 -9.02% 29,422 17.06% Walnut Creek 14,301 38.53% 22,815 61.47% -8,514 -22.94% 37,116 9.53% Unincorporated area 31,966 44.43% 39,985 55.57% -8,019 -11.15% 71,951 19.18% Crescent City Del Norte 623 52.13% 572 47.87% 51 4.27% 1,195 15.96% Unincorporated area 5,035 61.16% 3,198 38.84% 1,837 22.31% 8,233 12.86% Placerville El Dorado 2,364 54.58% 1,967 45.42% 397 9.17% 4,331 10.97% South Lake Tahoe 2,613 38.38% 4,195 61.62% -1,582 -23.24% 6,808 15.52% Unincorporated area 48,860 60.15% 32,372 39.85% 16,488 20.30% 81,232 4.84% Clovis Fresno 27,415 70.71% 11,356 29.29% 16,059 41.42% 38,771 21.08% Coalinga 2,278 74.52% 779 25.48% 1,499 49.04% 3,057 38.24% Firebaugh 944 76.38% 292 23.62% 652 52.75% 1,236 90.07% Fowler 1,213 74.88% 407 25.12% 806 49.75% 1,620 57.59% Fresno 88,649 64.73% 48,307 35.27% 40,342 29.46% 136,956 44.60% Huron 402 67.34% 195 32.66% 207 34.67% 597 108.31% Kerman 2,085 74.46% 715 25.54% 1,370 48.93% 2,800 63.32% Kingsburg 3,644 80.82% 865 19.18% 2,779 61.63% 4,509 26.02% Mendota 887 78.08% 249 21.92% 638 56.16% 1,136 109.30% Orange Cove 887 72.17% 342 27.83% 545 44.34% 1,229 100.11% Parlier 1,309 73.79% 465 26.21% 844 47.58% 1,774 107.03% Reedley 4,544 76.60% 1,388 23.40% 3,156 53.20% 5,932 52.14% San Joaquin 275 75.97% 87 24.03% 188 51.93% 362 110.68% Sanger 4,232 72.24% 1,626 27.76% 2,606 44.49% 5,858 68.90% Selma 4,011 74.15% 1,398 25.85% 2,613 48.31% 5,409 61.00% Unincorporated area 43,218 72.19% 16,651 27.81% 26,567 44.38% 59,869 25.40% Orland Glenn 1,546 70.56% 645 29.44% 901 41.12% 2,191 31.82% Willows 1,440 72.11% 557 27.89% 883 44.22% 1,997 24.44% Unincorporated area 4,249 74.66% 1,442 25.34% 2,807 49.32% 5,691 21.56% Arcata Humboldt 1,766 18.54% 7,761 81.46% -5,995 -62.93% 9,527 5.55% Blue Lake 242 34.38% 462 65.63% -220 -31.25% 704 7.85% Eureka 4,528 40.02% 6,787 59.98% -2,259 -19.96% 11,315 9.63% Ferndale 411 49.58% 418 50.42% -7 -0.84% 829 8.42% Fortuna 3,062 61.11% 1,949 38.89% 1,113 22.21% 5,011 15.05% Rio Dell 725 61.03% 463 38.97% 262 22.05% 1,188 17.12% Trinidad 57 25.11% 170 74.89% -113 -49.78% 227 3.26% Unincorporated area 14,505 42.09% 19,953 57.91% -5,448 -15.81% 34,458 7.38% Brawley Imperial 4,472 71.47% 1,785 28.53% 2,687 42.94% 6,257 62.69% Calexico 5,332 66.06% 2,739 33.94% 2,593 32.13% 8,071 99.06% Calipatria 526 73.98% 185 26.02% 341 47.96% 711 75.64% El Centro 7,388 68.31% 3,428 31.69% 3,960 36.61% 10,816 61.83% Holtville 1,051 73.45% 380 26.55% 671 46.89% 1,431 57.08% Imperial 2,786 71.93% 1,087 28.07% 1,699 43.87% 3,873 53.79% Westmorland 336 75.17% 111 24.83% 225 50.34% 447 78.68% Unincorporated area 5,157 71.38% 2,068 28.62% 3,089 42.75% 7,225 41.81% Bishop Inyo 764 54.38% 641 45.62% 123 8.75% 1,405 11.93% Unincorporated area 4,352 61.77% 2,693 38.23% 1,659 23.55% 7,045 11.91% Arvin Kern 1,640 75.47% 533 24.53% 1,107 50.94% 2,173 96.03% Bakersfield 79,206 75.18% 26,151 24.82% 53,055 50.36% 105,357 37.68% California City 2,568 68.83% 1,163 31.17% 1,405 37.66% 3,731 18.36% Delano 4,847 73.39% 1,757 26.61% 3,090 46.79% 6,604 87.54% Maricopa 272 81.68% 61 18.32% 211 63.36% 333 5.53% McFarland 1,329 78.27% 369 21.73% 960 56.54% 1,698 101.05% Ridgecrest 7,641 67.96% 3,602 32.04% 4,039 35.92% 11,243 2.38% Shafter 2,590 81.37% 593 18.63% 1,997 62.74% 3,183 63.84% Taft 1,849 80.57% 446 19.43% 1,403 61.13% 2,295 8.82% Tehachapi 2,311 75.55% 748 24.45% 1,563 51.10% 3,059 20.99% Wasco 2,801 80.79% 666 19.21% 2,135 61.58% 3,467 73.20% Unincorporated area 68,113 76.09% 21,407 23.91% 46,706 52.17% 89,520 22.93% Avenal Kings 736 70.77% 304 29.23% 432 41.54% 1,040 75.85% Corcoran 2,010 77.04% 599 22.96% 1,411 54.08% 2,609 70.25% Hanford 11,713 72.68% 4,402 27.32% 7,311 45.37% 16,115 31.18% Lemoore 4,885 71.37% 1,960 28.63% 2,925 42.73% 6,845 24.99% Unincorporated area 6,477 76.60% 1,979 23.40% 4,498 53.19% 8,456 26.92% Clearlake Lake 2,123 52.65% 1,909 47.35% 214 5.31% 4,032 36.79% Lakeport 1,052 51.75% 981 48.25% 71 3.49% 2,033 21.03% Unincorporated area 9,861 51.76% 9,190 48.24% 671 3.52% 19,051 20.45% Susanville Lassen 2,548 69.28% 1,130 30.72% 1,418 38.55% 3,678 10.56% Unincorporated area 5,473 72.17% 2,111 27.83% 3,362 44.33% 7,584 6.90% Agoura Hills Los Angeles 4,370 39.52% 6,689 60.48% -2,319 -20.97% 11,059 -2.73% Alhambra 13,507 53.83% 11,585 46.17% 1,922 7.66% 25,092 43.74% Arcadia 12,778 61.52% 7,994 38.48% 4,784 23.03% 20,772 23.85% Artesia 3,011 67.56% 1,446 32.44% 1,565 35.11% 4,457 59.10% Avalon 640 51.16% 611 48.84% 29 2.32% 1,251 13.42% Azusa 7,604 62.15% 4,631 37.85% 2,973 24.30% 12,235 54.06% Baldwin Park 11,010 62.81% 6,518 37.19% 4,492 25.63% 17,528 79.33% Bell 3,912 60.30% 2,576 39.70% 1,336 20.59% 6,488 85.87% Bell Gardens 4,187 59.81% 2,814 40.19% 1,373 19.61% 7,001 89.13% Bellflower 14,124 65.59% 7,409 34.41% 6,715 31.18% 21,533 62.84% Beverly Hills 5,789 34.64% 10,921 65.36% -5,132 -30.71% 16,710 -10.37% Bradbury 284 61.74% 176 38.26% 108 23.48% 460 9.59% Burbank 20,050 45.21% 24,298 54.79% -4,248 -9.58% 44,348 21.83% Calabasas 4,061 34.93% 7,566 65.07% -3,505 -30.15% 11,627 -5.67% Carson 23,232 65.07% 12,469 34.93% 10,763 30.15% 35,701 84.06% Cerritos 14,711 65.80% 7,646 34.20% 7,065 31.60% 22,357 45.08% Claremont 7,328 41.81% 10,199 58.19% -2,871 -16.38% 17,527 12.63% Commerce 2,283 58.21% 1,639 41.79% 644 16.42% 3,922 78.49% Compton 16,132 64.97% 8,699 35.03% 7,433 29.93% 24,831 120.48% Covina 10,897 61.17% 6,917 38.83% 3,980 22.34% 17,814 35.55% Cudahy 2,173 58.76% 1,525 41.24% 648 17.52% 3,698 85.55% Culver City 6,688 32.93% 13,621 67.07% -6,933 -34.14% 20,309 23.20% Diamond Bar 14,167 64.12% 7,929 35.88% 6,238 28.23% 22,096 39.94% Downey 22,514 63.46% 12,962 36.54% 9,552 26.93% 35,476 51.72% Duarte 4,794 58.49% 3,402 41.51% 1,392 16.98% 8,196 47.99% El Monte 12,479 60.52% 8,141 39.48% 4,338 21.04% 20,620 66.22% El Segundo 4,022 45.63% 4,793 54.37% -771 -8.75% 8,815 -3.32% Gardena 11,874 61.84% 7,326 38.16% 4,548 23.69% 19,200 77.09% Glendale 34,754 55.19% 28,217 44.81% 6,537 10.38% 62,971 42.50% Glendora 15,036 63.71% 8,565 36.29% 6,471 27.42% 23,601 15.79% Hawaiian Gardens 1,777 67.49% 856 32.51% 921 34.98% 2,633 76.59% Hawthorne 14,567 62.28% 8,822 37.72% 5,745 24.56% 23,389 85.14% Hermosa Beach 3,287 29.34% 7,917 70.66% -4,630 -41.32% 11,204 -15.38% Hidden Hills 362 32.04% 768 67.96% -406 -35.93% 1,130 -33.84% Huntington Park 6,102 59.78% 4,105 40.22% 1,997 19.57% 10,207 87.55% Industry 39 72.22% 15 27.78% 24 44.44% 54 7.41% Inglewood 22,904 60.97% 14,659 39.03% 8,245 21.95% 37,563 108.78% Irwindale 380 61.00% 243 39.00% 137 21.99% 623 65.05% La Canada Flintridge 5,881 51.64% 5,508 48.36% 373 3.28% 11,389 3.34% La Habra Heights 1,852 64.46% 1,021 35.54% 831 28.92% 2,873 3.99% La Mirada 13,527 65.86% 7,011 34.14% 6,516 31.73% 20,538 29.15% La Puente 6,071 62.97% 3,570 37.03% 2,501 25.94% 9,641 76.77% La Verne 9,702 60.98% 6,209 39.02% 3,493 21.95% 15,911 17.53% Lakewood 20,461 58.90% 14,275 41.10% 6,186 17.81% 34,736 30.13% Lancaster 30,577 67.56% 14,681 32.44% 15,896 35.12% 45,258 38.72% Lawndale 4,830 57.53% 3,566 42.47% 1,264 15.05% 8,396 58.55% Lomita 4,398 54.91% 3,612 45.09% 786 9.81% 8,010 20.96% Long Beach 73,864 47.07% 83,056 52.93% -9,192 -5.86% 156,920 35.19% Los Angeles 501,610 42.20% 687,027 57.80% -185,417 -15.60% 1,188,637 38.92% Lynwood 8,965 63.24% 5,211 36.76% 3,754 26.48% 14,176 103.49% Malibu 2,186 30.51% 4,979 69.49% -2,793 -38.98% 7,165 -8.92% Manhattan Beach 7,141 34.82% 13,370 65.18% -6,229 -30.37% 20,511 -15.29% Maywood 3,112 62.19% 1,892 37.81% 1,220 24.38% 5,004 96.43% Monrovia 7,817 51.74% 7,291 48.26% 526 3.48% 15,108 25.45% Montebello 10,877 56.59% 8,344 43.41% 2,533 13.18% 19,221 62.66% Monterey Park 10,276 57.58% 7,569 42.42% 2,707 15.17% 17,845 46.09% Norwalk 18,955 63.88% 10,719 36.12% 8,236 27.75% 29,674 64.93% Palmdale 27,515 65.66% 14,391 34.34% 13,124 31.32% 41,906 49.69% Palos Verdes Estates 4,265 51.42% 4,029 48.58% 236 2.85% 8,294 -9.31% Paramount 7,465 65.09% 4,003 34.91% 3,462 30.19% 11,468 93.61% Pasadena 24,353 42.44% 33,023 57.56% -8,670 -15.11% 57,376 30.75% Pico Rivera 12,295 59.00% 8,543 41.00% 3,752 18.01% 20,838 71.11% Pomona 21,399 60.88% 13,750 39.12% 7,649 21.76% 35,149 68.01% Rancho Palos Verdes 12,015 54.32% 10,104 45.68% 1,911 8.64% 22,119 5.84% Redondo Beach 13,405 39.47% 20,556 60.53% -7,151 -21.06% 33,961 0.98% Rolling Hills 674 55.75% 535 44.25% 139 11.50% 1,209 -19.61% Rolling Hills Estates 2,374 53.11% 2,096 46.89% 278 6.22% 4,470 -6.44% Rosemead 6,987 59.03% 4,850 40.97% 2,137 18.05% 11,837 54.92% San Dimas 9,917 62.35% 5,988 37.65% 3,929 24.70% 15,905 20.66% San Fernando 3,587 61.46% 2,249 38.54% 1,338 22.93% 5,836 79.88% San Gabriel 6,125 56.38% 4,738 43.62% 1,387 12.77% 10,863 38.00% San Marino 3,531 54.26% 2,976 45.74% 555 8.53% 6,507 -1.17% Santa Clarita 40,932 55.54% 32,760 44.46% 8,172 11.09% 73,692 8.34% Santa Fe Springs 3,656 59.44% 2,495 40.56% 1,161 18.87% 6,151 58.75% Santa Monica 11,016 22.56% 37,805 77.44% -26,789 -54.87% 48,821 5.63% Sierra Madre 2,858 43.04% 3,782 56.96% -924 -13.92% 6,640 0.76% Signal Hill 1,903 44.87% 2,338 55.13% -435 -10.26% 4,241 30.13% South El Monte 2,489 59.33% 1,706 40.67% 783 18.67% 4,195 75.79% South Gate 13,430 61.04% 8,573 38.96% 4,857 22.07% 22,003 85.28% South Pasadena 4,621 35.81% 8,282 64.19% -3,661 -28.37% 12,903 11.71% Temple City 7,555 61.60% 4,710 38.40% 2,845 23.20% 12,265 35.10% Torrance 33,298 53.83% 28,555 46.17% 4,743 7.67% 61,853 13.31% Vernon 29 78.38% 8 21.62% 21 56.76% 37 42.87% Walnut 8,012 64.21% 4,465 35.79% 3,547 28.43% 12,477 42.66% West Covina 21,971 61.36% 13,833 38.64% 8,138 22.73% 35,804 48.99% West Hollywood 2,696 13.78% 16,863 86.22% -14,167 -72.43% 19,559 -4.88% Westlake Village 2,264 46.19% 2,638 53.81% -374 -7.63% 4,902 -1.49% Whittier 19,031 57.46% 14,092 42.54% 4,939 14.91% 33,123 29.17% Unincorporated area 193,073 57.63% 141,971 42.37% 51,102 15.25% 335,044 51.86% Chowchilla Madera 2,207 77.44% 643 22.56% 1,564 54.88% 2,850 34.95% Madera 8,204 73.95% 2,890 26.05% 5,314 47.90% 11,094 60.50% Unincorporated area 20,495 72.79% 7,660 27.21% 12,835 45.59% 28,155 22.73% Belvedere Marin 423 30.09% 983 69.91% -560 -39.83% 1,406 -6.75% Corte Madera 1,223 22.63% 4,182 77.37% -2,959 -54.75% 5,405 7.19% Fairfax 650 13.37% 4,212 86.63% -3,562 -73.26% 4,862 6.36% Larkspur 1,682 22.94% 5,650 77.06% -3,968 -54.12% 7,332 5.45% Mill Valley 1,280 14.55% 7,520 85.45% -6,240 -70.91% 8,800 2.75% Novato 222 26.52% 615 73.48% -393 -46.95% 837 -3.88% Ross 9,348 35.98% 16,630 64.02% -7,282 -28.03% 25,978 15.43% San Anselmo 374 24.72% 1,139 75.28% -765 -50.56% 1,513 22.88% San Rafael 1,201 15.74% 6,428 84.26% -5,227 -68.51% 7,629 -10.78% Sausalito 6,825 26.01% 19,414 73.99% -12,589 -47.98% 26,239 16.06% Tiburon 912 18.79% 3,942 81.21% -3,030 -62.42% 4,854 -15.97% Unincorporated area 1,315 27.45% 3,475 72.55% -2,160 -45.09% 4,790 14.39% Multiple Districts 8,869 23.33% 29,151 76.67% -20,282 -53.35% 38,020 4.12% Unincorporated area Mariposa 5,961 62.09% 3,640 37.91% 2,321 24.17% 9,601 11.72% Fort Bragg Mendocino 975 35.92% 1,739 64.08% -764 -28.15% 2,714 23.13% Point Arena 36 18.85% 155 81.15% -119 -62.30% 191 18.43% Ukiah 2,533 42.17% 3,474 57.83% -941 -15.67% 6,007 22.70% Willits 761 41.95% 1,053 58.05% -292 -16.10% 1,814 24.77% Unincorporated area 10,344 35.68% 18,651 64.32% -8,307 -28.65% 28,995 14.25% Atwater Merced 5,296 72.64% 1,995 27.36% 3,301 45.27% 7,291 47.27% Dos Palos 973 77.96% 275 22.04% 698 55.93% 1,248 56.01% Gustine 1,095 69.30% 485 30.70% 610 38.61% 1,580 49.15% Livingston 1,688 69.90% 727 30.10% 961 39.79% 2,415 100.53% Los Banos 5,619 67.29% 2,732 32.71% 2,887 34.57% 8,351 58.95% Merced 12,881 65.99% 6,640 34.01% 6,241 31.97% 19,521 48.41% Unincorporated area 17,248 75.27% 5,666 24.73% 11,582 50.55% 22,914 42.95% Alturas Modoc 904 71.63% 358 28.37% 546 43.26% 1,262 18.66% Unincorporated area 2,375 75.18% 784 24.82% 1,591 50.36% 3,159 7.01% Mammoth Lakes Mono 939 34.92% 1,750 65.08% -811 -30.16% 2,689 0.20% Unincorporated area 1,486 53.34% 1,300 46.66% 186 6.68% 2,786 3.47% Carmel-by-the-Sea Monterey 903 35.76% 1,622 64.24% -719 -28.48% 2,525 4.45% Del Rey Oaks 349 38.14% 566 61.86% -217 -23.72% 915 15.90% Gonzales 1,000 57.01% 754 42.99% 246 14.03% 1,754 72.19% Greenfield 1,469 62.78% 871 37.22% 598 25.56% 2,340 88.54% King City 1,146 61.68% 712 38.32% 434 23.36% 1,858 59.67% Marina 3,431 49.20% 3,542 50.80% -111 -1.59% 6,973 37.49% Monterey 4,352 36.38% 7,611 63.62% -3,259 -27.24% 11,963 16.73% Pacific Grove 2,691 31.35% 5,893 68.65% -3,202 -37.30% 8,584 13.78% Salinas 19,690 56.42% 15,212 43.58% 4,478 12.83% 34,902 57.31% Sand City 43 42.57% 58 57.43% -15 -14.85% 101 21.07% Seaside 4,143 47.24% 4,627 52.76% -484 -5.52% 8,770 47.28% Soledad 1,798 59.32% 1,233 40.68% 565 18.64% 3,031 78.60% Unincorporated area 21,236 47.48% 23,490 52.52% -2,254 -5.04% 44,726 18.38% American Canyon Napa 3,391 54.02% 2,886 45.98% 505 8.05% 6,277 47.71% Calistoga 735 37.85% 1,207 62.15% -472 -24.30% 1,942 22.55% Napa 13,881 43.15% 18,286 56.85% -4,405 -13.69% 32,167 21.52% St. Helena 1,020 36.14% 1,802 63.86% -782 -27.71% 2,822 13.53% Yountville 814 44.60% 1,011 55.40% -197 -10.79% 1,825 23.38% Unincorporated area 6,386 45.82% 7,550 54.18% -1,164 -8.35% 13,936 10.72% Grass Valley Nevada 2,863 49.79% 2,887 50.21% -24 -0.42% 5,750 12.39% Nevada City 550 29.94% 1,287 70.06% -737 -40.12% 1,837 3.60% Truckee 2,569 34.82% 4,810 65.18% -2,241 -30.37% 7,379 6.43% Unincorporated area 21,635 53.73% 18,630 46.27% 3,005 7.46% 40,265 4.13% Aliso Viejo Orange 9,717 48.46% 10,336 51.54% -619 -3.09% 20,053 4.05% Anaheim 57,119 62.35% 34,488 37.65% 22,631 24.70% 91,607 29.60% Brea 11,320 62.21% 6,876 37.79% 4,444 24.42% 18,196 9.83% Buena Park 15,869 64.19% 8,854 35.81% 7,015 28.37% 24,723 36.70% Costa Mesa 19,457 49.52% 19,831 50.48% -374 -0.95% 39,288 5.64% Cypress 12,900 61.29% 8,149 38.71% 4,751 22.57% 21,049 18.39% Dana Point 8,953 51.05% 8,584 48.95% 369 2.10% 17,537 -2.83% Fountain Valley 16,236 61.14% 10,319 38.86% 5,917 22.28% 26,555 8.83% Fullerton 29,242 59.27% 20,095 40.73% 9,147 18.54% 49,337 18.11% Garden Grove 32,845 65.57% 17,246 34.43% 15,599 31.14% 50,091 26.83% Huntington Beach 49,780 53.15% 43,880 46.85% 5,900 6.30% 93,660 -1.04% Irvine 40,566 48.90% 42,393 51.10% -1,827 -2.20% 82,959 14.45% La Habra 12,297 64.32% 6,820 35.68% 5,477 28.65% 19,117 29.43% La Palma 4,345 66.00% 2,238 34.00% 2,107 32.01% 6,583 30.83% Laguna Beach 4,523 31.83% 9,685 68.17% -5,162 -36.33% 14,208 -9.15% Laguna Hills 8,273 56.85% 6,279 43.15% 1,994 13.70% 14,552 5.12% Laguna Niguel 17,441 53.86% 14,941 46.14% 2,500 7.72% 32,382 1.81% Laguna Woods 6,394 54.98% 5,236 45.02% 1,158 9.96% 11,630 15.26% Lake Forest 19,415 57.83% 14,156 42.17% 5,259 15.67% 33,571 6.46% Los Alamitos 2,921 57.61% 2,149 42.39% 772 15.23% 5,070 12.86% Mission Viejo 28,263 59.01% 19,629 40.99% 8,634 18.03% 47,892 7.02% Newport Beach 24,363 51.32% 23,108 48.68% 1,255 2.64% 47,471 -14.61% Orange 31,194 59.68% 21,074 40.32% 10,120 19.36% 52,268 10.42% Placentia 12,803 61.91% 7,877 38.09% 4,926 23.82% 20,680 12.69% Rancho Santa Margarita 12,625 57.20% 9,446 42.80% 3,179 14.40% 22,071 1.90% San Clemente 17,468 55.54% 13,985 44.46% 3,483 11.07% 31,453 -2.93% San Juan Capistrano 8,730 59.76% 5,878 40.24% 2,852 19.52% 14,608 4.67% Santa Ana 37,674 61.87% 23,221 38.13% 14,453 23.73% 60,895 56.86% Seal Beach 8,294 55.75% 6,582 44.25% 1,712 11.51% 14,876 7.26% Stanton 5,614 62.83% 3,321 37.17% 2,293 25.66% 8,935 35.48% Tustin 13,657 56.47% 10,529 43.53% 3,128 12.93% 24,186 18.29% Villa Park 2,466 66.45% 1,245 33.55% 1,221 32.90% 3,711 -10.95% Westminster 20,087 65.89% 10,398 34.11% 9,689 31.78% 30,485 17.80% Yorba Linda 22,711 65.76% 11,823 34.24% 10,888 31.53% 34,534 0.87% Unincorporated area 33,475 58.92% 23,344 41.08% 10,131 17.83% 56,819 -0.27% Auburn Placer 3,964 53.42% 3,456 46.58% 508 6.85% 7,420 9.33% Colfax 456 57.65% 335 42.35% 121 15.30% 791 16.30% Lincoln 13,169 63.88% 7,447 36.12% 5,722 27.76% 20,616 15.32% Loomis 2,308 63.81% 1,309 36.19% 999 27.62% 3,617 3.03% Rocklin 15,732 59.30% 10,797 40.70% 4,935 18.60% 26,529 5.90% Roseville 32,261 59.63% 21,838 40.37% 10,423 19.27% 54,099 10.12% Unincorporated area 35,087 59.12% 24,262 40.88% 10,825 18.24% 59,349 4.89% Portola Plumas 502 58.03% 363 41.97% 139 16.07% 865 10.68% Unincorporated area 6,074 60.07% 4,038 39.93% 2,036 20.13% 10,112 7.60% Banning Riverside 7,335 70.37% 3,089 29.63% 4,246 40.73% 10,424 35.79% Beaumont 6,973 67.81% 3,310 32.19% 3,663 35.62% 10,283 31.94% Blythe 2,339 70.39% 984 29.61% 1,355 40.78% 3,323 38.27% Calimesa 2,506 70.87% 1,030 29.13% 1,476 41.74% 3,536 17.29% Canyon Lake 3,609 69.30% 1,599 30.70% 2,010 38.59% 5,208 0.20% Cathedral City 7,147 52.71% 6,413 47.29% 734 5.41% 13,560 31.52% Coachella 3,317 66.74% 1,653 33.26% 1,664 33.48% 4,970 102.80% Corona 30,878 66.44% 15,596 33.56% 15,282 32.88% 46,474 32.20% Desert Hot Springs 2,981 55.91% 2,351 44.09% 630 11.82% 5,332 33.80% Hemet 17,640 70.11% 7,522 29.89% 10,118 40.21% 25,162 30.73% Indian Wells 1,629 61.70% 1,011 38.30% 618 23.41% 2,640 -12.03% Indio 11,866 64.24% 6,605 35.76% 5,261 28.48% 18,471 46.12% La Quinta 9,125 60.97% 5,841 39.03% 3,284 21.94% 14,966 9.16% Lake Elsinore 7,701 64.59% 4,221 35.41% 3,480 29.19% 11,922 32.56% Moreno Valley 33,701 68.66% 15,381 31.34% 18,320 37.33% 49,082 70.03% Murrieta 25,082 68.89% 11,328 31.11% 13,754 37.78% 36,410 19.29% Norco 6,216 68.35% 2,878 31.65% 3,338 36.71% 9,094 6.98% Palm Desert 11,415 56.89% 8,649 43.11% 2,766 13.79% 20,064 5.85% Palm Springs 6,774 35.09% 12,530 64.91% -5,756 -29.82% 19,304 6.86% Perris 7,830 69.94% 3,366 30.06% 4,464 39.87% 11,196 85.50% Rancho Mirage 4,380 51.02% 4,205 48.98% 175 2.04% 8,585 -4.87% Riverside 54,368 60.30% 35,799 39.70% 18,569 20.59% 90,167 34.90% San Jacinto 7,066 70.27% 2,989 29.73% 4,077 40.55% 10,055 42.88% Temecula 22,810 65.32% 12,108 34.68% 10,702 30.65% 34,918 13.42% Wildomar 7,351 70.18% 3,123 29.82% 4,228 40.37% 10,474 21.21% Unincorporated area 115,094 67.72% 54,868 32.28% 60,226 35.43% 169,962 30.05% Citrus Heights Sacramento 20,443 60.11% 13,566 39.89% 6,877 20.22% 34,009 14.47% Elk Grove 34,615 59.34% 23,717 40.66% 10,898 18.68% 58,332 35.83% Folsom 17,604 57.09% 13,233 42.91% 4,371 14.17% 30,837 6.20% Galt 5,257 69.10% 2,351 30.90% 2,906 38.20% 7,608 33.80% Isleton 185 60.46% 121 39.54% 64 20.92% 306 43.74% Rancho Cordova 12,367 56.94% 9,351 43.06% 3,016 13.89% 21,718 28.59% Sacramento 75,394 45.33% 90,926 54.67% -15,532 -9.34% 166,320 37.09% Unincorporated area 123,513 56.48% 95,179 43.52% 28,334 12.96% 218,692 20.52% Hollister San Benito 5,740 53.92% 4,905 46.08% 835 7.84% 10,645 45.15% San Juan Bautista 347 46.77% 395 53.23% -48 -6.47% 742 30.30% Unincorporated area 4,570 56.67% 3,494 43.33% 1,076 13.34% 8,064 15.59% Adelanto San Bernardino 3,549 69.17% 1,582 30.83% 1,967 38.34% 5,131 69.26% Apple Valley 18,968 73.10% 6,981 26.90% 11,987 46.19% 25,949 21.10% Barstow 4,166 67.93% 1,967 32.07% 2,199 35.86% 6,133 36.80% Big Bear Lake 1,684 62.91% 993 37.09% 691 25.81% 2,677 0.04% Chino 15,493 66.61% 7,765 33.39% 7,728 33.23% 23,258 38.76% Chino Hills 20,002 65.90% 10,351 34.10% 9,651 31.80% 30,353 29.28% Colton 8,702 66.18% 4,446 33.82% 4,256 32.37% 13,148 71.07% Fontana 31,058 67.78% 14,765 32.22% 16,293 35.56% 45,823 71.58% Grand Terrace 3,150 63.44% 1,815 36.56% 1,335 26.89% 4,965 26.07% Hesperia 17,634 73.31% 6,421 26.69% 11,213 46.61% 24,055 31.03% Highland 10,723 66.34% 5,441 33.66% 5,282 32.68% 16,164 39.96% Loma Linda 5,402 69.19% 2,405 30.81% 2,997 38.39% 7,807 39.67% Montclair 5,757 65.50% 3,032 34.50% 2,725 31.00% 8,789 61.72% Needles 964 65.36% 511 34.64% 453 30.71% 1,475 27.79% Ontario 26,844 66.14% 13,742 33.86% 13,102 32.28% 40,586 58.53% Rancho Cucamonga 41,360 64.51% 22,751 35.49% 18,609 29.03% 64,111 29.82% Redlands 17,886 59.39% 12,231 40.61% 5,655 18.78% 30,117 17.30% Rialto 17,055 69.03% 7,650 30.97% 9,405 38.07% 24,705 85.55% San Bernardino 31,882 65.78% 16,583 34.22% 15,299 31.57% 48,465 62.93% Twentynine Palms 2,766 64.12% 1,548 35.88% 1,218 28.23% 4,314 10.60% Upland 18,680 62.33% 11,290 37.67% 7,390 24.66% 29,970 24.17% Victorville 19,091 70.99% 7,802 29.01% 11,289 41.98% 26,893 51.74% Yucaipa 14,398 69.46% 6,329 30.54% 8,069 38.93% 20,727 15.17% Yucca Valley 5,199 67.07% 2,553 32.93% 2,646 34.13% 7,752 11.81% Unincorporated area 62,349 67.32% 30,273 32.68% 32,076 34.63% 92,622 22.71% Carlsbad San Diego 27,435 51.01% 26,344 48.99% 1,091 2.03% 53,779 2.45% Chula Vista 50,162 62.12% 30,583 37.88% 19,579 24.25% 80,745 44.57% Coronado 4,956 54.51% 4,136 45.49% 820 9.02% 9,092 -6.19% Del Mar 891 32.13% 1,882 67.87% -991 -35.74% 2,773 -7.10% El Cajon 19,703 63.26% 11,445 36.74% 8,258 26.51% 31,148 21.30% Encinitas 12,841 38.40% 20,597 61.60% -7,756 -23.20% 33,438 0.97% Escondido 27,778 63.95% 15,657 36.05% 12,121 27.91% 43,435 19.94% Imperial Beach 4,327 55.32% 3,495 44.68% 832 10.64% 7,822 27.97% La Mesa 13,369 50.60% 13,054 49.40% 315 1.19% 26,423 14.41% Lemon Grove 5,781 61.05% 3,689 38.95% 2,092 22.09% 9,470 40.77% National City 8,068 65.93% 4,170 34.07% 3,898 31.85% 12,238 63.38% Oceanside 37,667 59.09% 26,073 40.91% 11,594 18.19% 63,740 20.67% Poway 14,703 59.88% 9,852 40.12% 4,851 19.76% 24,555 2.00% San Diego 244,233 45.94% 287,371 54.06% -43,138 -8.11% 531,604 18.73% San Marcos 17,314 58.95% 12,059 41.05% 5,255 17.89% 29,373 16.65% Santee 15,386 62.36% 9,286 37.64% 6,100 24.72% 24,672 5.15% Solana Beach 3,036 41.24% 4,326 58.76% -1,290 -17.52% 7,362 -2.83% Vista 16,948 60.50% 11,063 39.50% 5,885 21.01% 28,011 20.80% Unincorporated area 131,027 65.19% 69,972 34.81% 61,055 30.38% 200,999 9.93% San Francisco San Francisco 92,536 24.81% 280,491 75.19% -187,955 -50.39% 373,027 20.20% Escalon San Joaquin 2,173 73.34% 790 26.66% 1,383 46.68% 2,963 25.07% Lathrop 2,572 64.51% 1,415 35.49% 1,157 29.02% 3,987 60.23% Lodi 15,413 69.05% 6,908 30.95% 8,505 38.10% 22,321 21.66% Manteca 13,978 66.38% 7,078 33.62% 6,900 32.77% 21,056 38.52% Ripon 4,855 76.26% 1,511 23.74% 3,344 52.53% 6,366 18.34% Stockton 49,429 62.34% 29,863 37.66% 19,566 24.68% 79,292 56.20% Tracy 14,990 60.79% 9,667 39.21% 5,323 21.59% 24,657 45.00% Unincorporated area 32,318 69.01% 14,515 30.99% 17,803 38.01% 46,833 27.90% Arroyo Grande San Luis Obispo 5,455 56.63% 4,178 43.37% 1,277 13.26% 9,633 11.04% Atascadero 7,772 55.56% 6,216 44.44% 1,556 11.12% 13,988 5.80% El Paso de Robles 7,342 59.63% 4,971 40.37% 2,371 19.26% 12,313 9.44% Grover Beach 2,879 53.76% 2,476 46.24% 403 7.53% 5,355 16.20% Morro Bay 2,722 44.59% 3,382 55.41% -660 -10.81% 6,104 9.87% Pismo Beach 2,593 53.06% 2,294 46.94% 299 6.12% 4,887 9.14% San Luis Obispo 8,065 34.86% 15,072 65.14% -7,007 -30.28% 23,137 6.47% Unincorporated area 30,476 54.00% 25,966 46.00% 4,510 7.99% 56,442 6.05% Atherton San Mateo 1,637 38.47% 2,618 61.53% -981 -23.06% 4,255 -6.61% Belmont 4,336 33.40% 8,647 66.60% -4,311 -33.20% 12,983 15.45% Brisbane 559 27.22% 1,495 72.78% -936 -45.57% 2,054 15.57% Burlingame 4,699 34.13% 9,068 65.87% -4,369 -31.74% 13,767 14.46% Colma 254 49.32% 261 50.68% -7 -1.36% 515 58.48% Daly City 15,081 49.92% 15,128 50.08% -47 -0.16% 30,209 50.99% East Palo Alto 3,045 51.72% 2,842 48.28% 203 3.45% 5,887 87.91% Foster City 5,159 38.53% 8,232 61.47% -3,073 -22.95% 13,391 21.21% Half Moon Bay 1,929 34.43% 3,674 65.57% -1,745 -31.14% 5,603 11.46% Hillsborough 2,641 42.76% 3,535 57.24% -894 -14.48% 6,176 -0.72% Menlo Park 4,418 28.31% 11,186 71.69% -6,768 -43.37% 15,604 11.52% Millbrae 4,689 49.21% 4,839 50.79% -150 -1.57% 9,528 34.57% Pacifica 6,490 33.63% 12,811 66.37% -6,321 -32.75% 19,301 20.98% Portola Valley 796 27.34% 2,116 72.66% -1,320 -45.33% 2,912 -5.20% Redwood City 10,792 35.92% 19,254 64.08% -8,462 -28.16% 30,046 22.80% San Bruno 7,285 44.49% 9,091 55.51% -1,806 -11.03% 16,376 39.57% San Carlos 5,168 31.80% 11,082 68.20% -5,914 -36.39% 16,250 8.17% San Mateo 15,305 37.18% 25,860 62.82% -10,555 -25.64% 41,165 23.21% South San Francisco 10,704 48.45% 11,387 51.55% -683 -3.09% 22,091 49.36% Woodside 1,132 33.60% 2,237 66.40% -1,105 -32.80% 3,369 -4.44% Unincorporated area 8,576 30.26% 19,764 69.74% -11,188 -39.48% 28,340 12.57% Buellton Santa Barbara 1,205 55.79% 955 44.21% 250 11.57% 2,160 14.99% Carpinteria 2,541 44.06% 3,226 55.94% -685 -11.88% 5,767 21.72% Goleta 5,960 41.60% 8,368 58.40% -2,408 -16.81% 14,328 15.60% Guadalupe 965 66.41% 488 33.59% 477 32.83% 1,453 77.31% Lompoc 7,617 62.99% 4,476 37.01% 3,141 25.97% 12,093 30.46% Santa Barbara 12,374 30.11% 28,720 69.89% -16,346 -39.78% 41,094 12.60% Santa Maria 14,977 68.29% 6,956 31.71% 8,021 36.57% 21,933 38.67% Solvang 1,539 55.90% 1,214 44.10% 325 11.81% 2,753 7.46% Unincorporated area 32,939 46.50% 37,902 53.50% -4,963 -7.01% 70,841 6.75% Campbell Santa Clara 6,646 39.54% 10,164 60.46% -3,518 -20.93% 16,810 19.39% Cupertino 10,565 46.03% 12,387 53.97% -1,822 -7.94% 22,952 35.19% Gilroy 7,842 51.23% 7,464 48.77% 378 2.47% 15,306 38.53% Los Altos 6,087 35.13% 11,239 64.87% -5,152 -29.74% 17,326 8.33% Los Altos Hills 1,967 38.52% 3,139 61.48% -1,172 -22.95% 5,106 3.98% Los Gatos 5,947 35.94% 10,598 64.06% -4,651 -28.11% 16,545 6.09% Milpitas 11,812 57.49% 8,733 42.51% 3,079 14.99% 20,545 48.29% Monte Sereno 818 37.71% 1,351 62.29% -533 -24.57% 2,169 -4.21% Morgan Hill 7,923 50.29% 7,831 49.71% 92 0.58% 15,754 23.99% Mountain View 9,076 30.65% 20,531 69.35% -11,455 -38.69% 29,607 17.67% Palo Alto 8,240 24.46% 25,444 75.54% -17,204 -51.07% 33,684 11.11% San Jose 152,515 47.84% 166,290 52.16% -13,775 -4.32% 318,805 35.84% Santa Clara 17,126 44.16% 21,659 55.84% -4,533 -11.69% 38,785 32.22% Saratoga 7,923 46.61% 9,076 53.39% -1,153 -6.78% 16,999 18.38% Sunnyvale 20,110 41.64% 28,186 58.36% -8,076 -16.72% 48,296 28.40% Unincorporated area 16,750 42.18% 22,961 57.82% -6,211 -15.64% 39,711 19.84% Capitola Santa Cruz 1,512 28.53% 3,788 71.47% -2,276 -42.94% 5,300 14.81% Santa Cruz 5,046 15.47% 27,579 84.53% -22,533 -69.07% 32,625 6.78% Scotts Valley 2,591 40.57% 3,796 59.43% -1,205 -18.87% 6,387 10.61% Watsonville 5,566 49.21% 5,745 50.79% -179 -1.58% 11,311 60.97% Unincorporated area 21,448 30.49% 48,885 69.51% -27,437 -39.01% 70,333 12.30% Anderson Shasta 2,238 70.44% 939 29.56% 1,299 40.89% 3,177 24.86% Redding 26,284 67.77% 12,502 32.23% 13,782 35.53% 38,786 12.38% Shasta Lake 2,760 69.52% 1,210 30.48% 1,550 39.04% 3,970 21.89% Unincorporated area 24,416 71.84% 9,573 28.16% 14,843 43.67% 33,989 12.80% Loyalton Sierra 277 70.84% 114 29.16% 163 41.69% 391 17.92% Unincorporated area 996 62.52% 597 37.48% 399 25.05% 1,593 4.63% Dorris Siskiyou 203 74.91% 68 25.09% 135 49.82% 271 12.00% Dunsmuir 392 49.25% 404 50.75% -12 -1.51% 796 22.83% Etna 277 69.42% 122 30.58% 155 38.85% 399 9.70% Fort Jones 195 68.90% 88 31.10% 107 37.81% 283 7.04% Montague 362 68.05% 170 31.95% 192 36.09% 532 -2.84% Mt. Shasta 766 44.12% 970 55.88% -204 -11.75% 1,736 19.40% Tulelake 158 72.48% 60 27.52% 98 44.95% 218 12.97% Weed 551 55.71% 438 44.29% 113 11.43% 989 36.25% Yreka 2,034 61.86% 1,254 38.14% 780 23.72% 3,288 6.74% Unincorporated area 7,730 61.20% 4,901 38.80% 2,829 22.40% 12,631 6.17% Benicia Solano 6,206 41.21% 8,853 58.79% -2,647 -17.58% 15,059 15.72% Dixon 4,286 60.91% 2,751 39.09% 1,535 21.81% 7,037 29.78% Fairfield 21,264 58.75% 14,928 41.25% 6,336 17.51% 36,192 46.71% Rio Vista 2,313 58.63% 1,632 41.37% 681 17.26% 3,945 26.03% Suisun City 5,817 59.71% 3,925 40.29% 1,892 19.42% 9,742 60.89% Vacaville 21,132 59.25% 14,535 40.75% 6,597 18.50% 35,667 27.94% Vallejo 22,972 52.65% 20,660 47.35% 2,312 5.30% 43,632 56.90% Unincorporated area 5,302 60.96% 3,396 39.04% 1,906 21.91% 8,698 14.23% Cloverdale Sonoma 1,617 43.94% 2,063 56.06% -446 -12.12% 3,680 27.53% Cotati 1,042 28.59% 2,602 71.41% -1,560 -42.81% 3,644 13.35% Healdsburg 1,756 31.61% 3,799 68.39% -2,043 -36.78% 5,555 13.78% Petaluma 9,416 33.28% 18,877 66.72% -9,461 -33.44% 28,293 17.25% Rohnert Park 6,319 36.15% 11,163 63.85% -4,844 -27.71% 17,482 19.99% Santa Rosa 24,611 34.54% 46,652 65.46% -22,041 -30.93% 71,263 20.43% Sebastopol 847 19.17% 3,572 80.83% -2,725 -61.67% 4,419 11.05% Sonoma 1,861 30.95% 4,151 69.05% -2,290 -38.09% 6,012 11.66% Windsor 5,176 43.56% 6,707 56.44% -1,531 -12.88% 11,883 23.86% Unincorporated area 23,498 31.47% 51,177 68.53% -27,679 -37.07% 74,675 11.88% Ceres Stanislaus 8,029 70.14% 3,418 29.86% 4,611 40.28% 11,447 57.02% Hughson 1,770 76.06% 557 23.94% 1,213 52.13% 2,327 35.79% Modesto 43,714 63.98% 24,609 36.02% 19,105 27.96% 68,323 35.31% Newman 1,676 69.03% 752 30.97% 924 38.06% 2,428 54.58% Oakdale 5,105 70.74% 2,112 29.26% 2,993 41.47% 7,217 24.38% Patterson 3,084 63.81% 1,749 36.19% 1,335 27.62% 4,833 59.87% Riverbank 4,464 70.72% 1,848 29.28% 2,616 41.44% 6,312 49.89% Turlock 15,204 68.33% 7,048 31.67% 8,156 36.65% 22,252 36.04% Waterford 1,832 75.95% 580 24.05% 1,252 51.91% 2,412 37.95% Unincorporated area 24,110 72.98% 8,925 27.02% 15,185 45.97% 33,035 32.15% Live Oak Sutter 1,553 73.92% 548 26.08% 1,005 47.83% 2,101 54.53% Yuba City 14,527 69.12% 6,489 30.88% 8,038 38.25% 21,016 28.27% Unincorporated area 6,952 72.25% 2,670 27.75% 4,282 44.50% 9,622 7.97% Corning Tehama 1,340 72.39% 511 27.61% 829 44.79% 1,851 36.43% Red Bluff 3,023 68.24% 1,407 31.76% 1,616 36.48% 4,430 28.83% Tehama 133 69.63% 58 30.37% 75 39.27% 191 13.11% Unincorporated area 13,281 73.87% 4,699 26.13% 8,582 47.73% 17,980 17.88% Unincorporated area Trinity 3,563 56.13% 2,785 43.87% 778 12.26% 6,348 16.87% Dinuba Tulare 2,963 78.68% 803 21.32% 2,160 57.36% 3,766 66.13% Exeter 2,357 77.56% 682 22.44% 1,675 55.12% 3,039 24.74% Farmersville 1,061 73.63% 380 26.37% 681 47.26% 1,441 73.16% Lindsay 1,169 76.81% 353 23.19% 816 53.61% 1,522 78.37% Porterville 8,433 75.95% 2,671 24.05% 5,762 51.89% 11,104 42.85% Tulare 10,322 76.87% 3,105 23.13% 7,217 53.75% 13,427 41.67% Visalia 27,615 71.70% 10,897 28.30% 16,718 43.41% 38,512 24.61% Woodlake 764 69.84% 330 30.16% 434 39.67% 1,094 77.85% Unincorporated area 23,894 77.61% 6,892 22.39% 17,002 55.23% 30,786 33.20% Sonora Tuolumne 1,676 56.36% 1,298 43.64% 378 12.71% 2,974 13.49% Unincorporated area 15,288 63.30% 8,865 36.70% 6,423 26.59% 24,153 12.21% Camarillo Ventura 18,253 55.30% 14,753 44.70% 3,500 10.60% 33,006 9.38% Fillmore 3,122 66.12% 1,600 33.88% 1,522 32.23% 4,722 53.64% Moorpark 8,521 53.64% 7,364 46.36% 1,157 7.28% 15,885 10.38% Ojai 1,547 37.78% 2,548 62.22% -1,001 -24.44% 4,095 10.21% Oxnard 28,235 57.97% 20,472 42.03% 7,763 15.94% 48,707 56.69% Port Hueneme 3,468 53.72% 2,988 46.28% 480 7.43% 6,456 36.05% San Buenaventura 24,660 47.65% 27,088 52.35% -2,428 -4.69% 51,748 17.16% Santa Paula 5,248 62.00% 3,217 38.00% 2,031 23.99% 8,465 54.95% Simi Valley 31,432 56.13% 24,564 43.87% 6,868 12.27% 55,996 7.36% Thousand Oaks 32,691 50.44% 32,126 49.56% 565 0.87% 64,817 3.60% Unincorporated area 21,542 48.84% 22,564 51.16% -1,022 -2.32% 44,106 7.87% Davis Yolo 7,371 22.84% 24,905 77.16% -17,534 -54.33% 32,276 8.36% West Sacramento 8,350 52.56% 7,536 47.44% 814 5.12% 15,886 30.28% Winters 1,388 55.79% 1,100 44.21% 288 11.58% 2,488 34.08% Woodland 10,851 56.28% 8,431 43.72% 2,420 12.55% 19,282 27.86% Unincorporated area 4,856 51.54% 4,565 48.46% 291 3.09% 9,421 13.73% Marysville Yuba 2,339 64.97% 1,261 35.03% 1,078 29.94% 3,600 21.31% Wheatland 853 66.28% 434 33.72% 419 32.56% 1,287 10.83% Unincorporated area 11,131 68.27% 5,173 31.73% 5,958 36.54% 16,304 21.06% Totals 7,001,084 52.24% 6,401,482 47.76% 599,602 4.47% 13,402,566 28.57% Cities & unincorporated areas that voted "Yes" on Proposition 8 and for Barack Obama Union City (Alameda) Sutter Creek (Amador) Williams (Colusa) Antioch (Contra Costa) Brentwood (Contra Costa) Hercules (Contra Costa) Oakley (Contra Costa) Pittsburg (Contra Costa) San Pablo (Contra Costa) Crescent City (Del Norte) Placerville (El Dorado) Firebaugh (Fresno) Fowler (Fresno) Fresno (Fresno) Huron (Fresno) Kerman (Fresno) Mendota (Fresno) Orange Cove (Fresno) Parlier (Fresno) San Joaquin (Fresno) Sanger (Fresno) Selma (Fresno) Brawley (Imperial) Calexico (Imperial) Calipatria (Imperial) El Centro (Imperial) Holtville (Imperial) Imperial (Imperial) Westmorland (Imperial) Bishop (Inyo) Arvin (Kern) Delano (Kern) McFarland (Kern) Shafter (Kern) Wasco (Kern) Avenal (Kings) Corcoran (Kings) Clearlake (Lake) Lakeport (Lake) Unincorporated area (Lake) Alhambra (Los Angeles) Arcadia (Los Angeles) Artesia (Los Angeles) Avalon (Los Angeles) Azusa (Los Angeles) Baldwin Park (Los Angeles) Bell (Los Angeles) Bell Gardens (Los Angeles) Bellflower (Los Angeles) Carson (Los Angeles) Cerritos (Los Angeles) Commerce (Los Angeles) Compton (Los Angeles) Covina (Los Angeles) Cudahy (Los Angeles) Diamond Bar (Los Angeles) Downey (Los Angeles) Duarte (Los Angeles) El Monte (Los Angeles) Gardena (Los Angeles) Glendale (Los Angeles) Hawaiian Gardens (Los Angeles) Hawthorne (Los Angeles) Huntington Park (Los Angeles) Inglewood (Los Angeles) Irwindale (Los Angeles) La Canada Flintridge (Los Angeles) La Puente (Los Angeles) Lakewood (Los Angeles) Lancaster (Los Angeles) Lawndale (Los Angeles) Lomita (Los Angeles) Lynwood (Los Angeles) Maywood (Los Angeles) Monrovia (Los Angeles) Montebello (Los Angeles) Monterey Park (Los Angeles) Norwalk (Los Angeles) Palmdale (Los Angeles) Paramount (Los Angeles) Pico Rivera (Los Angeles) Pomona (Los Angeles) Rosemead (Los Angeles) San Fernando (Los Angeles) San Gabriel (Los Angeles) Santa Fe Springs (Los Angeles) South El Monte (Los Angeles) South Gate (Los Angeles) Temple City (Los Angeles) Torrance (Los Angeles) Unincorporated area (Los Angeles) Walnut (Los Angeles) West Covina (Los Angeles) Whittier (Los Angeles) Madera (Madera) Atwater (Merced) Dos Palos (Merced) Gustine (Merced) Livingston (Merced) Los Banos (Merced) Merced (Merced) Gonzales (Monterey) Greenfield (Monterey) King City (Monterey) Salinas (Monterey) Soledad (Monterey) American Canyon (Napa) Anaheim (Orange) Buena Park (Orange) La Habra (Orange) Laguna Woods (Orange) Santa Ana (Orange) Stanton (Orange) Tustin (Orange) Auburn (Placer) Colfax (Placer) Cathedral City (Riverside) Coachella (Riverside) Desert Hot Springs (Riverside) Indio (Riverside) Lake Elsinore (Riverside) Moreno Valley (Riverside) Perris (Riverside) Riverside (Riverside) San Jacinto (Riverside) Elk Grove (Sacramento) Isleton (Sacramento) Rancho Cordova (Sacramento) Unincorporated area (Sacramento) Hollister (San Benito) Unincorporated area (San Benito) Adelanto (San Bernardino) Barstow (San Bernardino) Chino (San Bernardino) Colton (San Bernardino) Fontana (San Bernardino) Highland (San Bernardino) Loma Linda (San Bernardino) Montclair (San Bernardino) Ontario (San Bernardino) Rancho Cucamonga (San Bernardino) Rialto (San Bernardino) San Bernardino (San Bernardino) Victorville (San Bernardino) Carlsbad (San Diego) Chula Vista (San Diego) Imperial Beach (San Diego) La Mesa (San Diego) Lemon Grove (San Diego) National City (San Diego) Oceanside (San Diego) Lathrop (San Joaquin) Manteca (San Joaquin) Stockton (San Joaquin) Tracy (San Joaquin) Grover Beach (San Luis Obispo) Pismo Beach (San Luis Obispo) East Palo Alto (San Mateo) Buellton (Santa Barbara) Guadalupe (Santa Barbara) Lompoc (Santa Barbara) Santa Maria (Santa Barbara) Gilroy (Santa Clara) Milpitas (Santa Clara) Morgan Hill (Santa Clara) Weed (Siskiyou) Dixon (Solano) Fairfield (Solano) Rio Vista (Solano) Suisun City (Solano) Vacaville (Solano) Vallejo (Solano) Ceres (Stanislaus) Modesto (Stanislaus) Newman (Stanislaus) Patterson (Stanislaus) Riverbank (Stanislaus) Live Oak (Sutter) Unincorporated area (Trinity) Dinuba (Tulare) Farmersville (Tulare) Lindsay (Tulare) Woodlake (Tulare) Sonora (Tuolumne) Fillmore (Ventura) Moorpark (Ventura) Oxnard Ventura) Port Hueneme (Ventura) Santa Paula (Ventura) Thousand Oaks (Ventura) Unincorporated area (Yolo) West Sacramento (Yolo) Winters (Yolo) Woodland (Yolo) Post-election events Protests against Proposition 8 supporters Immediate response thumb|A post-Prop 8 demonstration at the State Capitol In California, a constitutional amendment passed by the electorate takes effect the day after the election. On the evening of November 4 the "Yes on 8" campaign issued a statement by Ron Prentice, the chairman of ProtectMarriage.com, saying "The people of California stood up for traditional marriage and reclaimed this great institution."Statement on Proposition 8 Passing by Ron Prentice, Chairman of ProtectMarriage.com ProtectMarriage.com November 4, 2008 http://www.protectmarriage.com/article/statement-on-proposition-8-passing-by-ron-prentice-chairman-of-protectmarriage-com November 14, 2008 https://web.archive.org/web/20081109045513/http://www.protectmarriage.com/article/statement-on-proposition-8-passing-by-ron-prentice-chairman-of-protectmarriage-com November 9, 2008 The organizers of the "No on Prop 8" campaign issued a statement on November 6 saying, "Tuesday's vote was deeply disappointing to all who believe in equal treatment under the law."Final Statement from No on Prop 8 Campaign No On 8, Equality for All November 6, 2008 http://www.noonprop8.com/ November 6, 2008 The counties of Los Angeles, San Francisco, Yolo, Kern, Santa Barbara, San Luis Obispo, Sonoma, San Diego, San Bernardino, Sacramento, and Tuolumne stopped issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples the day after the election.http://www.kcra.com/politics/17907210/detail.html Same-Sex Couple Tries To Marry, Turned Away KCRA.com November 5, 2008 November 5, 2008 https://web.archive.org/web/20120222045907/http://www.kcra.com/politics/17907210/detail.html February 22, 2012 http://m.cnn.com/cnn/archive/archive/detail/192095/full%3Bjsessionid=D916ADA38ABF74C8EB78D186E350AE1F.live5i Los Angeles stops issuing marriage licenses to gay couples CNN November 5, 2008 March 29, 2009 Emanuella Grinberg https://web.archive.org/web/20160304092517/http://m.cnn.com/cnn/archive/archive/detail/192095/full%3Bjsessionid%3DD916ADA38ABF74C8EB78D186E350AE1F.live5i March 4, 2016 http://www.bakersfield.com/102/story/601308.html https://web.archive.org/web/20160304035801/http://www.bakersfield.com/102/story/601308.html March 4, 2016 County clerk: No more marriage licenses will be issued to same-sex couples Bakersfield Californian Jenny Shearer November 5, 2008 March 29, 2009https://www.baltimoresun.com/2008/11/06/voters-approve-gay-marriage-bans-in-california-arizona-florida/ Voters Approve Gay Marriage Bans in California, Arizona, Florida November 6, 2008 The Baltimore Sun March 12, 2021 Fines Following an audit by the California Franchise Tax Board, the proponents of Proposition 8 faced a fine of $49,000 for violating California campaign finance disclosure laws, by failing to report $1,169,292 in contributions under the timelines required by state law.http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2012/08/prop-8-campaign-faces-fines-for-violating-campaign-disclosures.html Prop. 8 campaign faces fines for violating campaign disclosures Sacramento Bee Oot, Torey Van August 7, 2012 August 14, 2012 https://web.archive.org/web/20120811005500/http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2012/08/prop-8-campaign-faces-fines-for-violating-campaign-disclosures.html August 11, 2012 mdy-all Protests Following the passage of Proposition 8, mass protests took place across the state. These included protests outside the Los Angeles California Temple of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in Westwood, Los Angeles;https://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-protest7-2008nov07,0,3827549.story Prop. 8 protesters target Mormon temple in Westwood Los Angeles Times Garrison, Jessica Lin, Joanne amp 2008-11-06 2008-11-06 a march through Hollywood that blocked traffic and elicited police intervention;http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/World-News/Gay-Marriage-Protests-In-Los-Angeles-California-After-Referendum-Result-In-Favour-Of-Ban/Article/200811115144768?lpos=World_News_Second_World_News_Article_Teaser_Region_0&lid=ARTICLE_15144768_Gay_Marriage%3A_Protests_In_Los_Angeles%2C_California%2C_After_Referendum_Result_In_Favour_Of_Ban Gay Marriage Ban Protests In LA Sky News 2008-11-06 2008-11-06 and a candlelight vigil in front of the Sacramento Gay and Lesbian Center, along with a protest in front of the California State Capitol.Protests Against Gay-Marriage Ban Continue http://www.kcra.com/politics/17943031/detail.html https://web.archive.org/web/20120306032352/http://www.kcra.com/politics/17943031/detail.html 2012-03-06 2008-11-17 KCRA.comhttp://www.sacbee.com/101/story/1374863.html Sacramento rally protests Proposition 8 The Sacramento Bee Garza, Samantha 2008-11-06 2008-11-06 https://web.archive.org/web/20081211133100/http://www.sacbee.com/101/story/1374863.html December 11, 2008 In San Francisco, thousands gathered in front of the City Hall to protest the proposition and to perform a candlelit vigil. Speakers who voiced their opinion in opposition of Proposition 8 included state senator Mark Leno and Mayor of San Francisco Gavin Newsom.http://www.ktvu.com/politics/17914830/detail.html Thousands Attend Vigil Protesting Passage Of Prop. 8 KTVU 2008-11-06 2008-11-06 https://web.archive.org/web/20081109010730/http://www.ktvu.com/politics/17914830/detail.html 2008-11-09 Outside California, a protest at the headquarters of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in Salt Lake City, Utahhttp://www.abc4.com/content/news/slc/story/UPDATE-Same-sex-marriage-protest-held-near-LDS/Amue7PTHSkO-gAdlczv7qg.cspx Same-sex marriage protest held near LDS Temple Square abc4.com Brent Hunsaker Kerry Kinsey amp 2008-11-07 2009-03-20 https://web.archive.org/web/20110810025107/http://www.abc4.com/content/news/slc/story/UPDATE-Same-sex-marriage-protest-held-near-LDS/Amue7PTHSkO-gAdlczv7qg.cspx 2011-08-10 was addressed by local gay rights supporters including former Salt Lake City Mayor Rocky Anderson and three gay members of the Utah Legislature: Senator Scott McCoy and Representatives Christine Johnson and Jackie Biskupski.http://deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,705261463,00.html https://web.archive.org/web/20081110062204/http://www.deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,705261463,00.html dead November 10, 2008 Prop. 8 protest draws thousands in Salt Lake City The Deseret News Jared Page Clayton Norlen amp 2008-11-08 2008-11-11 On November 12, 2008, more than 10,000 protesters gathered outside the Manhattan New York Temple to protest the support of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints for Proposition 8.https://www.foxnews.com/story/new-yorkers-protest-gay-marriage-ban-outside-mormon-church New Yorkers Protest Gay Marriage Ban Outside Mormon Church Foxnews.com 2008-11-13 2013-12-02 live https://web.archive.org/web/20121025164502/http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,451446,00.html 2012-10-25 On November 15, 2008, tens of thousands of people in cities around the United States participated in rallies to protest the passage of Proposition 8 and to promote the expansion of civil marriage to same-sex couples throughout the nation.https://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/16/us/16protest.html Across U.S., Big Rallies for Same-Sex Marriage November 15, 2008 JESSE McKINLEY The New York Times Boycotts The passage of Proposition 8 led to opponents responding by publicly shaming its supporters as bigots and boycotting supporters' businesses and employers. On November 7, 2008, a blogger revealed that Scott Eckern, then Artistic Director of California Musical Theatre, had made a personal donation of $1,000 to the "Yes on 8" campaign.http://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/stories/2008/11/10/daily30.html Report: Musical Theatre board cancels emergency meeting over Prop. 8 support 2008-11-11 American City Business Journals Mark Anderson 2008-11-11 All campaign contributions of $1,000 or more required a name, home and occupation be listed. On November 10, gay artists condemned Eckern and called for a boycott of California Musical Theatre.http://www.sacbee.com/124/story/1387273.html Prop. 8 gift gets theater's leader in a ruckus 2008-11-11 sacbe.com https://web.archive.org/web/20090214110556/http://www.sacbee.com/124/story/1387273.html February 14, 2009 On November 11, Eckern issued an apology on the online site Playbill stating that a similar donation had been made to a human rights organization that includes gay rights as one of its causes.https://latimesblogs.latimes.com/culturemonster/2008/11/prop-8-blowback.html Prop. 8 repercussions hit Sacramento theater 2008-11-11 Los Angeles times 2008-11-11 On November 12, Eckern resigned from California Musical Theatre. Executive producer of the CMT Richard Lewis stated that Eckern was not forced to resign but did so of his own accord.Marcus Crowder Theater exec Eckern, caught in Prop. 8 flap, resigns http://www.sacbee.com/101/story/1393290.html The Sacramento Bee 2008-11-13 https://web.archive.org/web/20090215162239/http://www.sacbee.com/101/story/1393290.html 2009-02-15 Richard Raddon, director of the Los Angeles Film Festival, also resigned due to boycotts by the gay community.L.A. Film Festival director Richard Raddon resigns https://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/la-et-raddonresigns26-2008nov26,0,5947908.story Los Angeles Times 2008-11-25 Rachel Abramowitz Protests in California were marred by racial incidents. Due to their support of Proposition 8, reported as high as 70 percent, some African Americans attending events were allegedly subjected to racial epithets and felt threatened. California Assembly Speaker Karen Bass stated she was disturbed by the treatment of African Americans in the aftermath of the passage of the proposition. In reaction to the racial incidents, Evan Wolfson said, "In any fight, there will be people who say things they shouldn't say, but that shouldn't divert attention from what the vast majority are saying against this, that it's a terrible injustice."Alison Stateman What Happens If You're on Gay Rights' 'Enemies List' 2008-11-15 http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1859323,00.html?xid=rss-topstories https://web.archive.org/web/20081127184643/http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1859323,00.html?xid=rss-topstories November 27, 2008 Time 2009-07-19 https://www.cnn.com/2009/LIVING/06/12/what.matters.bass.gay.marriage/index.html Lawmaker: Don't Blame Blacks for Proposition 8 June 12, 2009 CNN March 12, 2021 Media MusicalTo protest the passage of Proposition 8, musical theatre composer Marc Shaiman wrote a satiric mini-musical called "Prop 8 — The Musical"."Prop 8 - The Musical" starring Jack Black, John C. Reilly, and many more... https://funnyordie.com/videos/c0cf508ff8/prop-8-the-musical-starring-jack-black-john-c-reilly-and-many-more-from-fod-team-jack-black-craig-robinson-john-c-reilly-and-rashida-jones Funny or Die https://web.archive.org/web/20180804223611/https://funnyordie.com/videos/c0cf508ff8/prop-8-the-musical-starring-jack-black-john-c-reilly-and-many-more-from-fod-team-jack-black-craig-robinson-john-c-reilly-and-rashida-jones August 4, 2018 December 2, 2008 dead The three-minute video was distributed on the internet at FunnyOrDie.com. The cast includes Jack Black (who plays Jesus), Nicole Parker, Neil Patrick Harris, John C. Reilly, Allison Janney, Andy Richter, Maya Rudolph, Margaret Cho, Rashida Jones, Kathy Najimy, Sarah Chalke, Jennifer Lewis, John Hill and other celebrities. It was directed by Adam Shankman. The video satirizes Christian churches that selectively pick and choose biblical doctrines to follow."Gay marriage a gift to California's economy", Los Angeles Times, LATimes.com, June 2, 2008 It received 1.2 million internet hits in its first day,Itzkoff, Dave. "Marc Shaiman on 'Prop 8 — The Musical'", The New York Times, December 4, 2008"Star-studded Web video protests Prop 8 – Spoof musical's blockbuster cast includes Jack Black as Jesus" https://web.archive.org/web/20200814202137/http://www.today.com/id/28055296 2020-08-14 , Associated Press, MSN.com, December 4, 2008 won the 2009 Webby Award category Comedy: Individual Short or Episode,http://www.webbyawards.com/webbys/current.php?media_id=97&season=13#film_comedy_short Webby Nominees: 13th Annual Webby Awards Nominees & Winners The Webby Awards 2013-03-19 and won a GLAAD media award.https://www.broadwayworld.com/article/Shaimans_Prop_8the_musical_Wins_GLAAD_Award_Honors_20010101 Shaiman's 'Prop 8-The Musical' Wins GLAAD Award Honors Broadway World 2009-04-21 2009-04-25 In 2010, 8: The Mormon Proposition, a documentary alleging the involvement of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in the passage of Proposition 8. Written by Reed Cowan and narrated by Dustin Lance Black, the film divided critics over a perceived heavy-handed approach to the church's involvement; it won the 2011 GLAAD Media Award for Outstanding Documentary. In 2011, 8, a play re-enacting the proceedings of Perry v. Brown in a condensed manner of documentary theatre, was premiered on Broadway. Controversies about campaign financing and donations On November 13, 2008, Fred Karger of the group Californians Against Hate filed a complaint with the California Fair Political Practices Commission that campaign finance reports filed by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints under-reported its actual Proposition 8 campaign expenses as $2,078.97.http://deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,705258856,00.html https://web.archive.org/web/20081216083634/http://www.deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,705258856,00.html dead December 16, 2008 LDS Church donates to pro-Prop. 8 group Deseret News The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints 2008-10-29 2009-02-07https://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/26/us/politics/26marriage.html Inquiry Set on Mormon Aid for California Marriage Vote The New York Times McKinley, Jesse 2008-11-25 2008-11-26 Karger charged that the Church's failure to report "non-monetary contributions" placed it in violation of California's Political Reform Act. Church spokesman Scott Trotter denied the charges, saying the church had "fully complied with the reporting requirements" and a "further report will be filed on or before [...the] due date, Jan. 30, 2009."http://deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,705262980,00.html?pg=1 https://web.archive.org/web/20090205121351/http://deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,705262980,00.html?pg=1 dead February 5, 2009 Prop 8 foes file complaint against LDS Deseret News The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints 2008-11-14 2009-02-07 In a report filed with the California Secretary of State's office January 30, 2009, the LDS Church reported its non-monetary expenditures as $189,903.58.http://cal-access.ss.ca.gov/Campaign/Committees/Detail.aspx?id=1311334&session=2007 Campaign Finance Summary Information The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints California Secretary of State 2009-01-30 2009-02-07 On January 31, the San Francisco Chronicle stated, "While the deadline for the report, which covers the period from July 1 to Dec. 31, is [February 2], many campaign contributions by major donors and independent committees must be reported within days after they're made." The article further stated that the executive director of the FPPC stated that the LDS church was still under investigation, and "In general, however, 'cases like these hinge over what had to be reported and when it had to be reported.' A late report covering disputed filings 'wouldn't remove the obligation to file on time' but would be considered by investigators."http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/01/31/BA7615KLB9.DTL https://web.archive.org/web/20090202144452/http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/01/31/BA7615KLB9.DTL dead February 2, 2009 Mormon church reports $190,000 Prop. 8 expenses 2009-04-03 Wildermuth John San Francisco Chronicle 2009-01-31 The Boston Herald reported on February 2, 2009:http://www.bostonherald.com/news/us_politics/view/2009_02_02_Mormon_church_reveals_deeper_involvement_in_California_s_Proposition_8/ Mormon church reveals deeper involvement in California's Proposition 8 Boston Herald 2 February 2009 2009-02-08 https://web.archive.org/web/20090214004712/http://www.bostonherald.com/news/us_politics/view/2009_02_02_Mormon_church_reveals_deeper_involvement_in_California_s_Proposition_8/ February 14, 2009 While many church members had donated directly to the Yes on 8 campaign—some estimates of Mormon giving range as high as $20 million—the church itself had previously reported little direct campaign activity. But in the filing made Friday, the Mormon church reported thousands in travel expenses, such as airline tickets, hotel rooms and car rentals for the campaign. The church also reported $96,849.31 worth of 'compensated staff time'—hours that church employees spent working to pass the same-sex marriage ban. In a statement issued February 2, 2009, the LDS Church responded to "erroneous news reports", saying its subsequent disclosure was "in no way prompted by an investigation by the California Fair Political Practices Commission," that "We believe we have complied with California law," and that the report's filing date met the January 31, 2009 deadline:https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/ldsnewsroom/eng/commentary/church-clarifies-proposition-8-filing-corrects-erroneous-news-reports Church Clarifies Proposition 8 Filing, Corrects Erroneous News Reports LDS Church 2 February 2009 2009-02-04 The Church, like other organizations on both sides of the ballot issue, was required to publicly file these donations by the 31 January deadline. The Church has been filing required contribution reports throughout the campaign. Those earlier donations 'initially stated' were filed for specific time periods prior to this last reporting period, as required by law. Other groups are also filing their final contribution reports to meet the same deadline. On January 7, 2009, supporters of Proposition 8 filed a federal lawsuit to block public disclosure of their donations. Alleging threats against their lives as well as other forms of harassment, the lawsuit also requested a preliminary injunction that ordered the California Secretary of State to remove information about donations posted on its website. Opponents of Proposition 8 called it "hypocritical" that its supporters would refer to their support of the measure as the "will of the people" while seeking to overturn voter-approved campaign disclosure laws.http://cbs5.com/national/proposition.8.donors.2.903852.html Calif.'s Prop. 8 Supporters Want Donors Anonymous 2009-01-09 2009-03-28 cbs5.com https://web.archive.org/web/20090204200558/http://cbs5.com/national/proposition.8.donors.2.903852.html February 4, 2009 U.S. District Judge Morrison England Jr. denied that request on January 29; he said that the public had the right to know about donors of political causes, that he did not agree that the plaintiffs had a probability of success in court, and that they had not proven they would suffer "irreparable injury" if he did not grant the preliminary injunction.http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2009/01/29/state/n135106S46.DTL Judge: Anti-gay marriage donors must be public Lawrence Steve 2009-01-29 Associated Press 2009-01-29 https://web.archive.org/web/20090215050438/http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=%2Fn%2Fa%2F2009%2F01%2F29%2Fstate%2Fn135106S46.DTL February 15, 2009 Litigation California Supreme Court cases thumb|180px|Protesters at the "Day of Decision" rally marched up Market Street in downtown San Francisco following the California Supreme Court ruling. thumb|180px|Pro- and anti-Proposition 8 protesters' rally in front of the San Francisco City Hall on the day of the Supreme Court hearings Strauss v. Horton After the passage of Proposition 8, a number of lawsuits were filed by against the state and state officials with the intent of overturning the measure and arguing that Proposition 8 should not have retroactive effect on existing same-sex marriages. On November 13, 2008, the California Supreme Court asked California Attorney General Jerry Brown for an opinion on whether the Court should accept these cases for review and whether the measure should be suspended while they decide the case. On November 19, the Court accepted three lawsuits challenging Proposition 8 but denied the requests to stay its enforcement.http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/presscenter/newsreleases/NR66-08.PDF California Supreme Court Takes Action on Proposition 8 2008-11-19 2008-11-19 Judicial Council of California The Court asked for final briefs by January 5, 2009. Oral arguments were held on March 5, 2009. On Tuesday May 26 the court ruled that "The Amendment to the State Constitution referred to as Proposition 8 is valid and enforceable from the moment it was passed."June 2009 The court also held that "Proposition 8 must be understood as creating a limited exception to the state equal protection clause."http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/opinions/documents/S168047.PDF https://web.archive.org/web/20090528012646/http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/opinions/documents/S168047.PDF 2009-05-28 Ruling in Strauss, et al. v. Horton and related cases, nos. S168047, S168066, S168078, California Supreme Court, May 26, 2009 2013-12-02 Justice Moreno in his lone dissenting opinion, argued that such a change to the Constitution should only be implemented "by a constitutional revision to modify the equal protection clause to protect some, rather than all, similarly situated persons" and not by a simple majority vote. The Court did rule that their decision cannot be applied to retroactively annul marriages that were transacted while the practice was legal in the state of California. Proposition 8 has no retroactive effect. The California Supreme Court ruled unanimously on May 26, 2009, that the approximately 18,000 same-sex marriages that had occurred prior to Proposition 8's passage would still be valid and must continue to be recognized in the state, since the amendment does not state explicitly that it would nullify the same-sex marriages performed before it took effect.http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/opinions/documents/S168047.PDF Strauss v. Horton California Supreme Court George, Ronald M. 2009-05-26 2009-05-26 http://webarchive.loc.gov/all/20090528012646/http%3A//www%2Ecourtinfo%2Eca%2Egov/opinions/documents/S168047%2EPDF May 28, 2009 Later legislation clarified that same-sex couples who married out-of-state within the window of legality would also retain their legal marriage rights. The bill was signed by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger on October 11, 2009.https://sacramento.bizjournals.com/sacramento/stories/2009/10/12/daily8.html California to recognize some out-of-state gay marriages Sacramento Biz Journal Robertson, Kathy 2009-10-12 2009-10-12 Federal challenges Smelt v. United States Immediately following the passage of Proposition 8, Arthur Smelt and Christopher Hammer filed suit in the Southern Division of the United States District Court for the Central District of California, in Orange County. In the case, Smelt v. United States, the couple argued that Proposition 8 and the Federal Defense of Marriage Act violated the Equal Protection Clause of the American constitution.https://www.clearinghouse.net/detail.php?id=12557 Smelt v United States Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse March 12, 2021 The United States Justice Department filed a motion to dismiss the case because the "plaintiffs are married, and their challenge to the federal Defense of Marriage Act ("DOMA") poses a different set of questions."https://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hVLXVV6bmG_wjIN5b_AzLQvPaKiwD98P72QG1 https://web.archive.org/web/20090617023850/http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hVLXVV6bmG_wjIN5b_AzLQvPaKiwD98P72QG1 dead June 17, 2009 DOJ moves to dismiss first fed gay marriage case Deutsch, Linda Linda Deutsch Associated Press 2009-06-12 2009-06-12 On July 15, 2009, District Judge Carter dismissed the part of Smelt that challenged Proposition 8, finding that the fact that the plaintiffs were already legally married in California meant they had no standing to challenge Proposition 8. The challenge to the Defense of Marriage Act, however, remained intact.http://hunterforjustice.typepad.com/files/smelt-order-dismg-prop-8-claim.pdf Order in Smelt v USA 2009-07-18 The remainder of the case was heard on August 3, 2009, in an Orange County district court.https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Gay-couple-s-weapon-in-lawsuit-Obama-s-words-3294308.php Gay couple's weapon in lawsuit: Obama's words San Francisco Chronicle Egelko, Bob 2009-06-23 2009-06-23 The lawsuit was thrown out because the two men had filed suit against the federal government in a state court, a technicality which meant the suit needed to be re-filed.https://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hVLXVV6bmG_wjIN5b_AzLQvPaKiwD9A9HD880 https://web.archive.org/web/20090911202135/http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hVLXVV6bmG_wjIN5b_AzLQvPaKiwD9A9HD880 dead September 11, 2009 US judge nixes suit that split Obama, gays Associated Press 2009-08-24 2009-08-24 Perry v. Schwarzenegger Perry v. Schwarzenegger On the day of Strauss v. Horton decision, the American Foundation for Equal Rights (AFER) filed suit in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California to challenge the validity of Proposition 8. Lambda Legal, the ACLU, and the National Center for Lesbian Rights have since announced their support for the lawsuit.https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/sdut-ca-gay-marriage-federal-062609-2009jun26-story.html The Associated Press Groups Back Federal Challenge to Gay Marriage Ban June 26, 2009 The San Diego Union-Tribune March 12, 2021 San Francisco filed a motion to and was granted intervenor status in the case, saying that their work in In re Marriage Cases and Strauss v. Horton provided them with "extensive evidence and proposed findings on strict scrutiny factors and factual rebuttals to long claimed justifications for marriage discrimination".http://www.sfgov.org/site/city_attorney_page.asp?id=108390 https://web.archive.org/web/20120505085950/http://www.sfgov.org/site/city_attorney_page.asp?id=108390 2012-05-05 San Francisco Moves to Intervene in Federal Challenge to Proposition 8 San Francisco City Attorney's Office 2009-07-23 2009-07-23 California Attorney General, and former and later again Governor Jerry Brown backed the lawsuit, saying that Proposition 8 violates the U.S. Constitution and should be struck down.https://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-gay-marriage13-2009jun13,0,5786790.story Jerry Brown again says Prop. 8 should be struck down Los Angeles Times Dolan, Mora Williams, Carol J. amp 2009-06-13 2009-06-18 Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger took a more neutral path,http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/08/19/BA7T19AQ10.DTL&tsp=1 https://web.archive.org/web/20090821132135/http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/08/19/BA7T19AQ10.DTL&tsp=1 dead August 21, 2009 Judge sets January trial for Prop. 8 lawsuit San Francisco Chronicle Egelko, Bob 2009-08-19 2009-08-19 saying that he supported the lawsuit because the Proposition 8 conflict asks "important constitutional questions that require and warrant judicial determination." Because this means that the Californian government will not defend the law in court,https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Governor-backs-federal-review-of-Prop-8-3294874.php Governor backs federal review of Prop. 8 San Francisco Chronicle Egelko, Bob 2009-06-17 2009-06-18 the proponents of Proposition 8's campaign were granted the right to intervene as defendants.https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/cert/12-144 Hollingswork v. Perry Cornell Law School September 15, 2021 The case was first heard on July 2, 2009, in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California in San Francisco, Judge Vaughn R. Walker presiding.http://www.ebar.com/news/article.php?sec=news&article=4003 Brown still fighting Prop 8 Bay Area Reporter Laird, Cynthia 2009-06-18 2009-06-23 In an act unprecedented in California history both the Governor and Attorney General refused to defend a constitutional amendment.http://www.sacbee.com/2010/12/06/3235672/live-from-san-francisco-its-proposition.html Live from San Francisco https://web.archive.org/web/20101208032041/http://www.sacbee.com/2010/12/06/3235672/live-from-san-francisco-its-proposition.html December 8, 2010 In August, Judge Walker heard further requests for intervenor status and ordered a trial set for January 2010. On August 4, 2010, U.S. District Chief Judge Vaughn R. Walker ruled Proposition 8 unconstitutional, but at the same time temporarily provided for a suspension of the ruling while he considered whether to grant an indefinite suspension pending appeal.https://www.cnn.com/2010/US/08/04/california.same.sex.ruling/index.html?hpt=T2 CNN Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage 2010-08-05 Walker lifted the stay on August 12, 2010, thus allowing same-sex marriages to be performed as of August 18, 2010.Judge Sets End to Ban on Gay Marriage in California https://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/13/us/13prop.html The New York Times 12 August 2010 Jesse McKinley 2010-08-12 On August 16, 2010, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit imposed a stay of all new same-sex marriages in the State of California. It also scheduled an accelerated time table for hearing an appeal of Judge Walker's ruling.http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/08/17/2984912.htm?section=world https://web.archive.org/web/20100819031827/http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/08/17/2984912.htm?section=world dead August 19, 2010 California gay marriages on hold again ((Reuters)) 17 August 2010 Australian Broadcasting Corporation 17 August 2010 Before the appeal trial begins, there will be a December 6, 20102010 12 6 hearing on who has legal standing to appeal the District Court's decision and whether the proposition violates equal protection rights. http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2010/11/prop-8-hearing-on-gay-marriage-will-be-filmed-by-c-span.html Los Angeles Times 2010-11-17 2010-11-18 L.A. Now Legal challenges Following the passing of Proposition 8 in 2008, and the subsequent mass protests, several lawsuits were filed in both the State Supreme Court and in the Federal District Court. State court: Strauss v. Horton Strauss v. Horton In considering the cases within the state courts, on November 13, 2008, the California Supreme Court asked California Attorney General Jerry Brown for an opinion on whether the Court should accept these cases for review and whether the measure should be suspended while they decide the case. On November 19, the Court accepted three lawsuits challenging Proposition 8, which consolidated into Strauss v. Horton.http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/presscenter/newsreleases/NR66-08.PDF California Supreme Court Takes Action on Proposition 8 November 19, 2008 November 19, 2008 Judicial Council of California The Court rendered its decision on May 26, 2009. The majority decision was that Proposition 8 "carved out a limited [or 'narrow'] exception to the state equal protection clause"; Justice Moreno dissented that exceptions to the Equal Protection Clause could not be made by any majority since its whole purpose was to protect minorities against the will of a majority. Until overturned by Hollingsworth v. Perry (below), the ruling established that Proposition 8 was valid as voted, but that marriages performed before it went into effect would remain valid. Federal court Hollingsworth v. Perry Perry v. Schwarzenegger After the California Supreme Court upheld the voter initiative, a suit, Perry v. Schwarzenegger (later Hollingsworth v. Perry), was filed in a Federal District Court in San Francisco. On August 4, 2010, U.S. District Chief Judge Vaughn Walker overturned Proposition 8, stating it is "unconstitutional under the Due Process Clause because no compelling state interest justifies denying same-sex couples the fundamental right to marry."Perry v Schwarzeneggar (pg 113–114) https://www.scribd.com/goodasyou/d/35374462-California-Prop-8-Ruling-August-2010 February 8, 2012 February 10, 2012 https://web.archive.org/web/20120210133548/http://www.scribd.com/goodasyou/d/35374462-California-Prop-8-Ruling-August-2010y Scribd is an unauthenticated host May 2026 The court also determined that "Proposition 8 violated the Equal Protection Clause because there is no rational basis for limiting the designation of 'marriage' to opposite-sex couples."Perry v Schwarzeneggar (pp. 119–122) https://www.scribd.com/goodasyou/d/35374462-California-Prop-8-Ruling-August-2010 February 8, 2012 February 10, 2012 https://web.archive.org/web/20120210133548/http://www.scribd.com/goodasyou/d/35374462-California-Prop-8-Ruling-August-2010y Scribd is an unauthenticated host May 2026 The court also stayed the ruling; the voter initiative was to remain in effect pending appeal. On August 12, Walker announced his decision to lift the stay (which would have allowed same-sex marriages to be performed) 2010 August 18 y US.Judge Sets End to Ban on Gay Marriage in California https://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/13/us/13prop.html The New York Times August 12, 2010 Jesse McKinley August 12, 2010Final Stay Order https://www.scribd.com/doc/35799834/Final-Stay-Order?tsp=1 Scribd August 12, 2010y Scribd is an unauthenticated host May 2026 However, on August 16, 2010, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit indefinitely extended the District Court's stay, stopping new same-sex marriages in the state of California pending appeal. It also scheduled an accelerated time table for hearing an appeal of Walker's ruling.http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/08/17/2984912.htm?section=world https://web.archive.org/web/20100819031827/http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/08/17/2984912.htm?section=world dead August 19, 2010 California gay marriages on hold again Reuters August 17, 2010 Australian Broadcasting Corporation August 17, 2010 Perry v. Brown (on appeal) As the State of California chose not to appeal the ruling, an appeal was sought by two parties—the initiative proponents, and Imperial County (via its deputy clerk). The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals considered the question of standing first. On January 4, 2011, the Ninth Circuit ruled that Imperial County did not have standing to intervene in the lawsuit (by now called Perry v. Brown)—the formal reason being the county's appeal had been "untimely", but also that the appellant was the county's deputy clerk, and precedent existed in other cases that a deputy clerk could not 'represent' a county. To address the question whether the initiative proponents had particularized standing (that is, standing either via personal interest, or standing to represent the State's interest), the Ninth Circuit certified a question to the California Supreme Court on January 4, 2011, asking that court to rule whether, under the California Constitution or otherwise under California law, non-governmental proponents of an initiative have standing to appeal when the State is no longer willing to defend it.Wisckol Martin https://www.ocregister.com/news/gay-282710-court-marriage.html Prop. 8 gay marriage ruling hits detour Ocregister.com January 4, 2011 October 31, 2011 On February 16, 2011, the California Supreme Court unanimously agreed to address the Ninth Circuit's request.https://us.cnn.com/2011/US/02/16/california.proposition.8/ California Supreme Court to decide issue in same-sex marriage ban case CNN February 16, 2011 February 16, 2011 The court set an expedited schedule for the hearinghttps://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2011-feb-17-la-me-proposition8-20110217-story.html California Supreme Court reenters Proposition 8 fray Maura Dolan Los Angeles Times February 17, 2011 February 27, 2011 and heard oral arguments on September 6, 2011.September 7, 2011 Yesterday's Hearing On Standing In The Prop 8 Case: Full Video, Reactions Andy Towle https://www.towleroad.com/2011/09/prop8full.html#ixzz1ewYFwGOB On November 17, 2011, the California Supreme Court issued an advisory opinion that the proponents of Proposition 8 did have standing, and could defend it.Ariane de Vogue November 17, 2011 Prop 8: California Supreme Court Rules Sponsors Can Continue Case https://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/11/prop-8-california-supreme-court-rules-sponsors-can-continue-case/ ABC News11/17/11 Perry v Brown California Supreme Court http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/opinions/documents/S189476.PDF Ninth Circuit ruling thumb|right|200px|Seal of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit On February 7, 2012, a three-judge panel on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued a 2–1 majority opinion affirming the judgment in Perry v. Schwarzenegger, which declared Proposition 8 unconstitutional, saying it violated the Equal Protection Clause. The opinion, written by Judge Stephen Reinhardt and joined by Judge Michael Hawkins, states that Proposition 8 did nothing more than lessen the status and dignity of gays and lesbians, and classify their relationships and families as inferior to those of opposite-sex couples.Perry v Brown (pg 5) https://www.scribd.com/doc/80680002/10-16696-398-Decision February 8, 2012 The court found that the people of California, by using their initiative power to target a minority group and withdraw the right to marry they once possessed under the California State Constitution, violated the federal Constitution.Perry v Brown (pg 79–80) https://www.scribd.com/doc/80680002/10-16696-398-Decision February 8, 2012 The court concluded that the trial court had correctly found Proposition 8 to have no purpose other than to impose the majority's private disapproval of gays, lesbians, and their relationships through the public law, and to take away from them the designation of marriage and its recognized societal status.Perry v Brown (pg 77) https://www.scribd.com/doc/80680002/10-16696-398-Decision February 8, 2012 The findings of fact and expert witness testimony in District Court played an important role in this appellate decision, emphasizing that it is unreasonable to believe Proposition 8 was enacted to: promote childrearing by biological parents, encourage procreation, be cautious in social change, protect religious liberty, or control children's education.Perry v Brown (pg 69) https://www.scribd.com/doc/80680002/10-16696-398-Decision February 8, 2012 The court declared that it is "implausible to think that denying two men or two women the right to call themselves married could somehow bolster the stability of families headed by one man and one woman".Perry v Brown (pg 63) https://www.scribd.com/doc/80680002/10-16696-398-Decision February 8, 2012Court: Calif. gay-marriage ban unconstitutional CBS/AP CBS News February 7, 2012 https://www.cbsnews.com/news/court-calif-gay-marriage-ban-unconstitutional/ February 8, 2012 The dissenting judge, Judge N. Randy Smith, noted in his dissent that states do legitimately prohibit sexual relationships condemned by society such as incest, bigamy, and bestiality, and impose age limits for marriage without violating constitutional rights.http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2012/02/gay-marriage-divide-evident-even-among-judges-in-proposition-8-case.html Dissenting Prop. 8 judge says 'optimal partnership' is man, woman Latimesblogs.latimes.com 2012-02-07 2013-12-03 He stated that "gays and lesbians are not a suspect or quasi-suspect class" and are thus not entitled to the courts' increased scrutiny of laws that affect them. He wrote, "The family structure of two committed biological parents—one man and one woman—is the optimal partnership for raising children." He also said that governments have a legitimate interest in "a responsible procreation theory, justifying the inducement of marital recognition only for opposite-sex couples" because only they can have children. He urged judicial restraint, that the justices should refrain from striking down Proposition 8.Jamison Peter http://blogs.sfweekly.com/thesnitch/2012/02/prop_8_appeals_dissent_smith.php Prop. 8 Appeals Court Ruling: Inside the Dissenting Opinion Blogs.sfweekly.com 2012-02-07 2013-12-03 fr En banc review denied On February 21, 2012, proponents requested to have the case reviewed fr en banc by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.Prop. 8 backers seek full review by appeals court https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2012-feb-22-la-me-prop8-appeal-20120222-story.html February 29, 2012 Los Angeles Times February 22, 2012 Maura Dolan If granted, fr en banc review could have taken a year or more, which would have delayed possible U.S. Supreme Court review. Pending the appeal, a stay was continued, barring any marriages from taking place.McVeigh Karen Prop 8: California gay marriage ban struck down by federal appeals court The Guardian February 7, 2012 https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/feb/07/prop-8-california-gay-marriage-ban-struck-down February 8, 2012 London On June 5, 2012, the full Ninth Circuit refused to rehear the case; the stay would remain in place pending final action by the Supreme Court.https://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_20786293/proposition-8-case-headed-u-s-supreme-court California's Proposition 8 case headed to U.S. Supreme Court Mercurynews.com November 15, 2012 2012-06-05 The Ninth Court's ruling was subsequently vacated (withdrawn) although it affirmed the district court ruling, since the Supreme Court later determined that the proponents of Proposition 8 had not had standing to appeal the district court's ruling. Hollingsworth v. Perry (U.S. Supreme Court) The proposition's proponents filed a petition for certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court on July 30, 2012, requesting that the Supreme Court review the case.Denniston, Lyle "Proposition 8" defenders' appeal filed (FINAL UPDATE) https://www.scotusblog.com/2012/07/proposition-8-appeal-filed/ SCOTUSblog July 31, 2012 August 3, 2012 Briefs in opposition both from the individual respondents and from the City and County of San Francisco were filed August 24, and the petitioners replied on September 4.Hollingsworth v. Perry, no. 12-144, (docket). Retrieved September 7, 2012. On December 7, 2012, the Supreme Court granted the proponents' petition for certiorariThe Ticket https://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/supreme-court-hear-gay-marriage-cases-201555862.html Supreme Court will hear two gay marriage cases | The Ticket Yahoo! News 2012-12-07 2013-11-01 and asked to be briefed for arguments concerning the petitioners' Article III standing,supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders (access date: 2013-11-01) amid considerable anticipation of a finding of a lack of justiciability in order to avoid a holding on the merits.http://www.scotusblog.com/?p=157896 Understanding standing: The Court's Article III questions in the same-sex marriage cases (I) SCOTUSblog 2013-01-17 2013-11-01 Oral arguments were heard on March 26, 2013. Parties who lodged amicus briefs with the court included: Judge Georg Ress and the Marriage Law Foundation; William N. Eskridge Jr., et al.; the Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence; the Public Advocate of the United States, et al.; the National Association of Evangelicals, et al.; the American Civil Rights Union; Judicial Watch, Inc., et al.; the Eagle Forum Education & Legal Defense Fund, Inc.; the Foundation for Moral Law; and the state of Indiana, et al. The Supreme Court issued a 5–4 decision on June 26, 2013.Clarke Rachel http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2013/06/26/supreme-court/?hpt=hp_t1 Supreme Court strikes down part of DOMA, dismisses Prop. 8 appeal June 26, 2013 June 26, 2013 CNN June 26, 2013 https://web.archive.org/web/20130626155758/http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2013/06/26/supreme-court/?hpt=hp_t1 dead Chief Justice Roberts wrote for the majority, and was joined by Justices Scalia, Ginsburg, Breyer, and Kagan. Justices Kennedy, Thomas, Alito, and Sotomayor were in the minority.https://theweek.com/article/index/246191/strange-bedfellows-the-rationale-of-the-prop-8-dissenters Strange bedfellows: The rationale of the Prop 8 dissenters The Week 2013-06-26 2013-11-01 The Court found the proponents did not have standing to appeal in federal court. To have standing, they "must have suffered an injury in fact, thus giving [them] a sufficiently concrete interest in the outcome of the issue in dispute". Because no injury had been shown, the appeal to the Ninth Circuit should have been dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. (This only applied to the Ninth Circuit and Supreme Court cases.) The Court returned the case to the Ninth Circuit with instructions to dismiss the appeal. This left the district court's ruling overturning Proposition 8 as the final ruling in the case. Because the appeal was decided on the question of standing, the Supreme Court did not examine nor rule on whether in their view Proposition 8 had violated the U.S. Constitution. Justice Kennedy, writing for the minority, said the views of the California Supreme Court on the proponents' standing should have been respected, because "the basic premise of the initiative process [and] the essence of democracy is that the right to make law rests in the people and flows to the government, not the other way around".13 Aftermath thumb|alt=Two women sitting on the top of the back seat of an open-top automobile waving to a crowd.|Plaintiffs Perry and Stier at the June 30, 2013, Pride Parade in San Francisco after their marriage On June 28, 2013, the Ninth Circuit lifted its stay of the district court's ruling, enabling same-sex marriages to resume; minutes afterward, plaintiffs Perry and Stier became the first couple in California to legally wed under state law since the enactment of Proposition 8 in 2008, doing so at San Francisco City Hall at 4:45 PDT, with California's Attorney General Kamala Harris officiating at the ceremony.Same-sex marriages resume in Calif.: San Francisco plaintiffs in Prop. 8 ruling are first couple to wed after appellate action. Winter Michael https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/06/28/california-gay-marriage/2474109/ USA Today June 28, 2013 June 28, 2013 There were two legal challenges made to the implementation of the ruling, both subsequently denied: Federal court legal challenge to removal of stay On June 29, 2013, the proponents of Proposition 8 filed an emergency motion with the U.S. Supreme Court to vacate the Ninth Circuit's lifting of its stay, claiming it had been "premature"."Emergency stay of California same-sex marriages sought", SCOTUSblog, June 29, 2013 The next day, June 30, 2013, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, responsible for overseeing the Ninth Circuit, denied the motion without comment."New gay marriage challenge fails", SCOTUSblog, June 30, 2013. State court legal challenges to statewide implementation of ruling Even before the Ninth Circuit lifted its stay, Proposition 8 proponents had expressed the intent to fight on, by asserting that the ruling only applies to the persons or counties involved and would be unlawful for other couples or counties to comply with it.Goodbye and good riddance to Prop. 8—Los Angeles Times, editorial, June 27, 2013 Two petitions to this effect were filed with the California Supreme Court, by proponents (Hollingsworth v. O'Connell and Brown, July 12, 2013) and—against county policy—by a San Diego County Clerk (Dronenburg, July 19, 2013: dropped August 2 as duplicative). The proponents' petition challenged the state and county clerk responses to the ruling in Perry, asserting that, in their view, only two counties were affected by the ruling and other counties had no legal capacity to discretionally do likewise; that the plaintiffs, not representing a class, had their relief while others who were not plaintiffs had no change to their position within the law; and that county clerks were not in fact covered by the ruling and were therefore bound to comply with the law as it stood. This position was rejected by California's governor, who on legal adviceProp. 8 backers ask court to stop weddings SFGate, 2013-07-12, by Bob Egelko. ordered the change to license issuance, according to the ruling.Same-sex marriage foes file suit in clerk's name—SFGate 2013-07-19, by Bob Egelko. California's Attorney General Kamala Harris noted that "state officials are obligated to govern marriage equally in all counties and that [United States District Court for the Northern District of California Chief Judge Vaughn] Walker's ruling specifically covers those officials." San Francisco's city attorney stated that it was "the most basic concepts of American law ... that a state court will not overrule the federal judiciary". Twenty-four County Clerks stated, through their lawyer, that their role was "ultimately state supervised" and it would be unfeasible to have a "patchwork" of different marriage criteria varying between the counties of a single state.24 Calif. county clerks back same-sex marriages—SFGate, 2013-07-22, by Bob Egelko. On July 15, the California Supreme Court unanimously declined the request to order an immediate halt to same-sex marriages in the state pending a decision on the petition. The court requested arguments from the parties on the points raised in their petition.https://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-prop-8-20130716,0,3411024.story California Supreme Court rejects bid to halt same-sex marriages Los Angeles Times Maura Dolan July 15, 2013 July 17, 2013 On August 14, 2013, the California Supreme Court unanimously rejected the challenge by Proposition 8 proponents.https://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-california-supreme-court-prop-8-20130814,0,1311803.story Los Angeles Times August 14, 2013 California Supreme Court rejects bid to revive Prop. 8 Maura Dolan Repeal 2009–2022 On April 30, 2009, the members of 'Yes! on Equality' submitted a ballot initiative dubbed "California Marriage Equality Act" to the Attorney General's office, requesting a title and summary. The text of the ballot would repeal Article I, Section 7.5 of the Californian Constitution as well as clarifying that no school curriculum will be changed and no clergy will be forced to perform any "service or duty incongruent with their faith". Yes! on Equality had until August 17, 2009, to gather 694,354 signatures in order to qualify for the June 2010 ballot.http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/elections_j.htm 2009 Ballot Measure Update California Secretary of State 2009-06-18 https://web.archive.org/web/20080605022341/http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/elections_j.htm 2008-06-05http://ag.ca.gov/cms_attachments/initiatives/pdfs/i808_initiative_09-0011.pdf California Marriage Equality Act California Secretary of State 2009-05-30 2009-06-18 https://web.archive.org/web/20090710182402/http://ag.ca.gov/cms_attachments/initiatives/pdfs/i808_initiative_09-0011.pdf 2009-07-10 A petition for initiative for the November 2010 ballot also failed to obtain enough signatures.https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE63B5N620100412 Gay marriage fails to get on California ballot Peter Henderson 2010-04-12 Reutershttps://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2010-apr-13-la-me-gay-marriage13-2010apr13-story.html Prop. 8 repeal fails to qualify for November ballot Maura Dolan Los Angeles Times 2010-04-13 Several LGBTQ groups of color (including API Equality-LA, HONOR PAC, and the Jordan/Rustin Coalition) published a statement "Prepare to Prevail", https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http://www.preparetoprevail.com/pdfs/Prepare_To_Prevail_FINAL.pdf Prepare to Prevail PreparetoPrevail.com July 13, 2009 in which they argued that the ballot repeal effort should be delayed until 2012. The repeal effort was subsequently canceled in light of victorious court cases.https://blog.sfgate.com/nov05election/2009/07/14/coalition-of-lgbt-groups-next-year-too-soon-for-gay-marriage-vote-in-ca/ Coalition of LGBT groups: Next year too soon for gay marriage vote in CA Garofoli Joe 2009-07-17 San Francisco Chronicle 2009-07-17 2024 repeal 2024 California Proposition 3 On February 14, 2023, following comments by Clarence Thomas in the U.S. Supreme Court decision Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization that called for the court to review Obergefell v. Hodges, lawmaker Evan Low introduced ACA-5 into the California legislature.https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240ACA5 A resolution to propose to the people of the State of California an amendment to the Constitution of the State, relating to rights February 14, 2023 California Legislative Information February 15, 2023 A legislatively referred constitutional amendment repealing the ban on same-sex marriage was proposed for the 2024 California elections; activists stated that 2024 would be the appropriate time for a ballot measure to prevent public competition for attention with 2022 California Proposition 1.https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/California-s-LGBTQ-leaders-are-pushing-to-17280666.php California's LGBTQ leaders are pushing to remove zombie same-sex marriage ban from the state Constitution Gardiner Dustin July 5, 2022 San Francisco Chronicle November 18, 2022https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-politics-and-policy/california-will-try-enshrine-right-sex-marriage-rcna70556 California will try to enshrine right to same-sex marriage February 14, 2022 Associated Press NBC News February 14, 2022 In June 2023, the California State Assembly passed ACA-5 in a unanimous vote, and the following month another unanimous vote took place in the California State Senate, therefore placing the proposal to repeal Proposition 8 on the ballot in 2024.https://edition.cnn.com/2023/07/14/politics/california-prop-8-repeal/index.html California voters will decide whether to repeal state's Prop 8 same sex marriage ban in 2024 Melissa Alonso Shania Shelton July 14, 2023 CNN July 16, 2023 The measure was approved by over 61% of voters. The text of the Constitution was changed to read: "the right to marry is a fundamental right".https://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_3,_Right_to_Marry_and_Repeal_Proposition_8_Amendment_(2024) California Proposition 3, Right to Marry and Repeal Proposition 8 Amendment (2024) Ballotpedia See also LGBTQ Conservatism California Proposition 22 Briggs Initiative Houston Proposition 1 (2015)—a veto referendum which led to the repealing of an ordinance protecting LGBTQ rights. LGBTQ rights in California List of former U.S. state constitutional amendments banning same-sex unions by type Obergefell v. Hodges—a 2015 U.S. Supreme Court case holding that the right to marry is guaranteed to same-sex couples. San Francisco 2004 same-sex weddings—a prior controversy that sparked In re Marriage Cases and led to Proposition 8 SaveCalifornia.com United States v. Windsor—a 2013 U.S. Supreme Court case, decided along with Hollingsworth v. Perry, that struck down Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act, thereby granting federal benefits to same sex couple who are married under state law 8 (or 8 the Play)—an American play that portrays the closing arguments of Perry v. Schwarzenegger, the federal trial that led to the overturn of Proposition 8 References 30em External links Proposition 8 The District Court's decision in Perry v Schwarzenegger (Prop 8 Unconstitutional) The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Decision Affirming Perry v Schwarzenegger (Prop 8 Unconstitutional) Video—Ninth Circuit Appeals Court Trial on the Merits Video—Ninth Circuit Appeals Court Trial on Recusal ProtectMarriage.com: Organizational sponsor of Proposition 8 No On Prop. 8: Organizational opponent to Proposition 8 California Official Voter Information Guide on Proposition 8, Title and summary, analysis, arguments and rebuttals, and the text of the proposition. Scan of Initiative from California Attorney General website The Money Behind the 2008 Same-Sex Partnership Ballot Measures—OpenSecrets Proposition 8 map a detailed hyper-linked map on David Leips election atlas. Hollingsworth v. Perry at SCOTUSblog Amicus briefs filed in Hollingsworth v. Perry from the City Attorney of San Francisco Category:Initiatives in the United States Category:Opposition to same-sex marriage in the United States Category:Same-sex marriage ballot measures in the United States 8 Category:Marriage in California