Judge won't change title of gay marriage amendment | McClatchy Washington Bureau

×
Sign In
Sign In
    • Customer Service
    • Mobile & Apps
    • Contact Us
    • Newsletters
    • Subscriber Services

    • All White House
    • Russia
    • All Congress
    • Budget
    • All Justice
    • Supreme Court
    • DOJ
    • Criminal Justice
    • All Elections
    • Campaigns
    • Midterms
    • The Influencer Series
    • All Policy
    • National Security
    • Guantanamo
    • Environment
    • Climate
    • Energy
    • Water Rights
    • Guns
    • Poverty
    • Health Care
    • Immigration
    • Trade
    • Civil Rights
    • Agriculture
    • Technology
    • Cybersecurity
    • All Nation & World
    • National
    • Regional
    • The East
    • The West
    • The Midwest
    • The South
    • World
    • Diplomacy
    • Latin America
    • Investigations
  • Podcasts
    • All Opinion
    • Political Cartoons

  • Our Newsrooms

You have viewed all your free articles this month

Subscribe

Or subscribe with your Google account and let Google manage your subscription.

Politics & Government

Judge won't change title of gay marriage amendment

August 08, 2008 06:22 PM

A ballot label that declares that Proposition 8 "eliminates (the) right of same-sex couples to marry" will remain intact after a Sacramento County judge on Friday dismissed a challenge by supporters of the measure.

Sponsors of the Nov. 4 ballot measure had argued that Attorney General Jerry Brown's formal title and summary of the measure were prejudicial.

But Sacramento County Judge Timothy Frawley disagreed that Brown acted in favor of opponents of the measure when he changed the ballot title -- "Limit on Marriage" -- that was on petitions circulated last year to qualify the ballot measure.

"Petitioner has failed to explain why the term 'eliminates' is inherently argumentative, while the term 'limit' is not," Frawley, who heard arguments in the case on Thursday, said in a ruling rendered today.

The judge also rejected the contention of opponents that the measure's title and summary is misleading because it fails to distinguish between the initiative's "purpose" and "effects."

"The Attorney General is not required to make any such distinction, and even if he were, petitioner has not shown that a meaningful distinction exists between the purpose and effects of this particular initiative," the judge wrote.

Read the full story at sacbee.com.

Read Next

Congress

Lindsey Graham finds himself on the margins of shutdown negotiations

By Emma Dumain

January 04, 2019 04:46 PM

Sen. Lindsey Graham is used to be in the middle of the action on major legislative debates, but he’s largely on the sidelines as he tries to broker a compromise to end the government shutdown.

KEEP READING

MORE POLITICS & GOVERNMENT

Congress

Who will replace Roberts? Kansas senator’s retirement could spur wild 2020 race

January 04, 2019 04:12 PM

Immigration

Trump officials exaggerate terrorist threat on southern border in tense briefing

January 04, 2019 05:29 PM

White House

HUD delays release of billions of dollars in storm protection for Puerto Rico and Texas

January 04, 2019 03:45 PM

Congress

Kansas Republican Pat Roberts announces retirement, sets up open seat race for Senate

January 04, 2019 11:09 AM

Congress

Mitch McConnell, ‘Mr. Fix It,’ is not in the shutdown picture

January 04, 2019 05:14 PM

Congress

Here’s when the government shutdown will hurt even more

January 04, 2019 03:25 PM
Take Us With You

Real-time updates and all local stories you want right in the palm of your hand.

McClatchy Washington Bureau App

View Newsletters

Subscriptions
  • Newsletters
Learn More
  • Customer Service
  • Securely Share News Tips
  • Contact Us
Advertising
  • Advertise With Us
Copyright
Privacy Policy
Terms of Service