When was gay marriage legalized in oregon
The Journey to Marriage Equality in the Joined States
The road to nationwide marriage equality was a long one, spanning decades of United States history and culminating in victory in June 2015. Throughout the long battle for marriage equality, HRC was at the forefront.
Volunteer with HRC
From gathering supporters in small towns across the country to rallying in front of the Supreme Court of the United States, we gave our all to confirm every person, regardless of whom they love, is recognized equally under the law.
A Growing Call for Equality
Efforts to legalize queer marriage began to pop up across the territory in the 1990s, and with it challenges on the state and national levels. Civil unions for same-sex couples existed in many states but created a separate but same standard. At the federal level, couples were denied access to more than 1,100 federal rights and responsibilities associated with the institution, as well as those denied by their given state. The Defense of Marriage Act was signed into law in 1996 and defined marriage by the federal government as between a male and woman, thereby allowing states to deny m
Same-Sex Marriage
This marriage license, photograph, and wedding announcement document the marriage of Toni Tortorilla and Ruth Broeski on Pride 12, 2004. On Wednesday, March 3, 2004, Multnomah County began to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. Four Multnomah County commissioners - Lisa Naito, Maria Rojo de Steffey, Serena Cruz, and chair Diane Linn - made the decision based on a legal opinion written by County Attorney Agnes Sowle, but they were not united by the fifth commissioner, Lonnie Roberts.
Agnes Sowle's legal view concluded that denying marriage licenses to same-sex couples was a violation of Article I, Section 20, of the Oregon Constitution, which states: "No rule shall be passed granting any citizen or class of citizens privileges, or immunities, which, upon the same terms, shall not equally belong to all citizens." Sowle reasoned that the state's Constitution preempted its legal code, which defines marriage as "a civil agree entered into in person by males at least 17 years of age and females at least 17 years of age." The code later refers to married couples as those who "take each other to be husband and wife."
In response to Sowle's opinon and t
Oregon State Bar Bulletin JANUARY 2005
By Merle Weiner
With the passage of Measure 36, Oregonians have said that marriage shall not be extended to gay couples. The voters probably did not realize that the finding of Measure 36s passage is that heterosexual marriage is now threatened. Wait a minute, you might say. How can that be? After all, the opponents of same-sex marriage said exactly the opposite: Same-sex marriage was supposed to threaten opposite-sex marriage.
The irony is the logical fallout of an application of Article I, Section 20 of the Oregon Constitution, something that Measure 36 did not change in anyway. That provision says "No law shall be passed granting to any citizen or class of citizens privileges or immunities, which, upon the same terms, shall not equally belong
This week, as Oregon celebrates 20 official years of Event NW, our collective has a lot to reflect on. For at least ten years, LGBT Oregonians have been mired in controversy over whether they could marry. In 2004, Multnomah County began issuing marriage licenses to lgbtq+ couples, only to be ordered to stop issuing them in the ensuing court case. The Oregon Supreme Court ruled in 2005 that the 2004 marriages were invalid from their inception. In the meantime, voters approved Ballot Measure 36, which amended Oregon’s constitution to prohibit the contracting of homosexual marriages in the state, as successfully as the recognition of same-sex marriages celebrated elsewhere. And so it remained the law in Oregon for almost ten years.
In 2013, the United States Supreme Court decided the case of United States v. Windsor. Edith Windsor was a Modern York widow, married to Thea Spyer in Canada in 2007. After Thea’s death, Edith was forced to spend about $350,000 in estate taxes. If she had been married to a man, Edith would have had an exemption. However, the federal Defense of Marriage Act, which prohibited federal recognition of same-sex ma