2006 Colorado Amendment 43

none February 2026 February 2026 Amendment 43 Definition of Marriage Initiative November 7, 2006 Colorado 855,206 699,030 1,586,105 2,533,058 62.6 250px County results Yes #47729E 70–80% 1px #AAAAAA solid #7D9CBB 60–70% 1px #AAAAAA solid #B6C8D9 50–60% 1px #AAAAAA solid No #8B8B54 70–80% 1px #AAAAAA solid #BCBC83 60–70% 1px #AAAAAA solid #DEDEBD 50–60% 1px #AAAAAA solid Source: https://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/elections/Results/Abstract/pdf/2000-2099/2006AbsractBook.pdf Official Publication of the Abstract of Votes Cast for the 005 Coordinated 2006 Primary 2006 General June 14, 2024 April 1, 2021 https://web.archive.org/web/20210401005901/https://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/elections/Results/Abstract/pdf/2000-2099/2006AbsractBook.pdf dead Colorado Amendment 43 was a referendum approved by the voters in 2006 that added a new section to Article II of the Colorado Constitution to define marriage in Colorado as only a union between one man and one woman. It passed with 55% of votes. AMERICA VOTES: 2006 CNN 2007 http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2006/pages/results/ballot.measures/ In November 2024, over 64% of Colorado voters passed Amendment J, which repealed the 2006 anti-gay clause within the state constitution. Background On November 3, 1992, Colorado voters approved Amendment 2, which added language to the state constitution that prohibited the state and all of its subdivisions from allowing "homosexual, lesbian or bisexual orientation, conduct, practices or relationships" to provide the basis for any "claim any minority status, quota preferences, protected status or claim of discrimination." In 1994, the Colorado Supreme Court found the amendment unconstitutional.Solotoff Lawrence Sex Discrimination and Sexual Harassment in the Work Place 2006 Law Journal Press NY 1–14 9781588520623 https://books.google.com/books?id=u6hpaEiUsNsC&pg=SA1-PA14 In 1996, the U.S. Supreme Court held in Romer v. Evans that the amendment, because it "allows discrimination against homosexuals and prevents the state from protecting them", was "motivated by animus towards homosexuals" and violated their rights under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.Koppelman Andrew The Gay Rights Question in Contemporary American Law 2002 University of Chicago Press 6ff 9780226451039 https://books.google.com/books?id=s1zmx-V9V88C&pg=PA6 Drafting The amendment was drafted by Lieutenant Governor Jane Norton and her husband, former U.S. Attorney Michael J. Norton.https://denvercatholic.org/beacon-hope-gala-honor-mike-jane-norton/ Beacon of Hope gala to honor Mike and Jane Norton Laugesen Wayne December 20, 2017 Denver Catholic Archdiocese of Denver September 4, 2019 September 4, 2019 https://web.archive.org/web/20190904214526/https://denvercatholic.org/beacon-hope-gala-honor-mike-jane-norton/ dead Lieutenant Governor Norton explained "If we really don't take a stand now, it's really a matter of time before we lose the uniqueness of marriage. If we lose the uniqueness of marriage, we lose a fundamental building block of society."Colleen Slevin Associated Press October 27, 2006 Norton joins gay marriage fight The Coloradoan Fort Collins, Colorado https://www.newspapers.com/clip/105395773/jan-norton-leads-outlawing-of-gay-marria/ September 4, 2019 Content The amendment provided that the only marriages recognized under the state constitution would be between a man and a woman whether licensed and celebrated as provided by law or established by common law by a couple who live together and hold themselves out publicly as husband and wife.Colorado Blue Book Proposed Amendment 43, accessed January 24, 2013 At the time the amendment was adopted, the benefits of marriage in Colorado included collecting benefits such as pensions, life insurance, and workers' compensation without being designated as a beneficiary; jointly incurring and being held liable for debts; making medical treatment decisions for each other; protection from discrimination based on marital status in areas such as employment and housing; filing income taxes jointly; and ending a marriage and distributing property through a legal process. Campaign Groups in favor of Amendment 43 contended that it would preserve the commonly accepted and historical definition of marriage and that the marriage of a man and woman provides an optimal environment for creating, nurturing, and protecting children and preserving families. They also aimed to prevent the state courts from expanding the definition of marriage to same-sex couples. Groups opposed to the amendment argued that it was inappropriate to add the definition of marriage to the constitution's Bill of Rights, which defines individual rights. They also argued the amendment was itself an unconstitutional form of discrimination, and redundant in that same-sex marriage was already prohibited by both state and federal statute. Pre-decision opinion polls Date of opinion pollConducted bySample sizeIn favorAgainstUndecidedMarginMargin of ErrorSource 2006 Denver Post 625 voters 51% left 43% ? ? ? Marriage limits set to face stiff fight in 3 states September 2006 POS (R) for Rocky Mountain News ? 58% left ? ? ? ? 2006 Ballot Measures: A National Scorecard See also Marriage Civil union List of Colorado ballot measures References Category:2006 Colorado ballot measures Category:2006 in LGBTQ history Category:LGBTQ in Colorado Category:U.S. state constitutional amendments banning same-sex unions Category:Same-sex marriage ballot measures in the United States Category:Initiatives in the United States Category:Discrimination against LGBTQ people in the United States Category:Constitution of Colorado Category:Amendments to the Constitution of Colorado