|
Catania Calls On Opponents Of Marriage Equality To Halt Their Efforts To Discriminate Against District Residents
Washington, D.C. – Earlier today, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals upheld the District of Columbia’s prohibition on ballot measures that violate the human rights of its residents. Specifically, the court upheld the D.C. Board of Elections’ November 2009 decision to deny a petition for a ballot initiative, filed by Harry Jackson, that would prohibit same-sex marriages in the District. Today’s Court of Appeals ruling is the latest in a string of defeats for opponents of civil marriage equality. It is the third such judicial opinion in the past year upholding the right of the District of Columbia to prohibit ballot measures which discriminate against its citizens.
Last December, the Council approved the Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Equality Amendment Act of 2009, which grants the right of same-sex couples to marry in the District. Councilmember David Catania (At-Large), the author of the legislation, said he is grateful to the Court of Appeals and relieved that the residents of the District will not be subjected to discriminatory ballot measures, in which outside groups frequently spend large sums to pit neighbor against neighbor and attempt to demonize members of particular communities.
“Today is a great day for marriage equality in the District,” said Catania. “I am grateful to the court. I am also proud of the way our city has embraced this law and want to congratulate the thousands of couples that have married in the District as a result of it.”
In January, Judge Judith Macaluso ruled in favor of the District of Columbia in the case Jackson vs. District of Columbia Board of Elections and Ethics. The opinion upheld the Board of Elections’ decision to prohibit a ballot initiative that would deny gay and lesbian couples the right to marry in the District of Columbia. The petitioners appealed to the District of Columbia Court of Appeals, which sat en banc to hear the case on May 4, 2010.
Today’s decision, in part, held that although the power of initiative is broad, “it can be no broader than the Council intended when it initiated legislation to share its direct legislative authority with the electorate.” Opinion at 19. Furthermore, the court affirmed that the Council’s interpretation of the Charter Amendments Act, which is reflected in the Human Rights Act safeguard, is entitled to substantial deference. Opinion at 29. And finally, the court ruled that the Home Rule Act gave the Council authority to direct the Board of Elections to refuse to accept Initiative and Referendum Measures that would authorize or have the effect of authorizing discrimination. Opinion at 40.
After learning of today’s victory, Catania called on the opponents of marriage equality to cease their efforts to overturn the new law, which is nearly unanimously supported by the District’s elected leadership.
“The opponents of marriage equality have lost at every level – twice before the District’s elected legislature, twice before the Board of Elections, twice in Superior Court, and now at the Court of Appeals. While I respect the right of all Americans to advocate their position in every possible venue, in light of today’s decision, I believe that it is time for the leaders of these efforts to return to their home states and let the residents of the District live their lives.”
|
