March 12, 2012
By Adam Bink
On March 4, we reported that efforts were underway to bring same-sex marriage to a ballot vote in Ohio as early as this year. Backers had to submit signatures to have the ballot language considered, then go and collect several hundred thousand signatures to actually move the measures to the ballot.
However, on Friday, Attorney General DeWine (an opponent of same-sex marriage, and the same Mike DeWine who supported a federal constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage) rejected the proposal on subdued legal grounds, writing:
After reviewing the submission, I conclude that I am unable to certify the summary as a fair and truthful statement of the proposed constitutional amendment for three reasons. First, the summary is longer than the text of the amendment… Second, the summary states that the amendment retains the rights contained in “Section 11 of Article XV for political subdivisions to not recognize a legal status for relationships of unmarried individuals.” However, the text of the amendment does not indicate that political subdivisions would retain these rights. Third, the summary states that the amendment retains “the portions of Title 31 that codifies this Amendment.” However, the text of the amendment does not contain any reference to Title 31.
It’s not clear what, if any, recourse backers have except perhaps through the courts to move forward with this issue.