Sacremento, CA – Today, California State Judge Loren McMaster ruled that “marriage” is no more than a label and upheld California laws AB 205 and AB 25, which essentially mimic marriage except in name only. Judge McMaster held that while Proposition 22 prohibits the Legislature from enacting laws to permit “same-sex marriage”, it does not prohibit the Legislature from granting all the rights of marriage, but by a different name.

After former Governor Gray Davis signed AB 205 into law on September 19, 2003, Randy Thomasson and Campaign for California Families (“CCF”), filed suit against former Governor Gray Davis arguing that these laws nullifying the vote of more than 4.5 million Californians. Thomasson and CCF are represented by Mathew Staver, President and General Counsel of Liberty Counsel, and Rena Lindevaldsen, Senior Litigation Counsel.

In 2000, 61.4% of the electorate voted in favor of Proposition 22, which provides that only a marriage between a man and woman is valid in California. The California constitution prohibits any legislative amendments to a state-wide voter initiative without further voter approval. In complete disregard for the will of the people and the state Constitution, Governor Davis signed AB 205 in law on September 19, 2003. AB 205 grants registered same-sex couples virtually all of the rights of marriage, except for federal income tax status, which only the federal government could grant. In fact, the language of AB 205 states: “registered domestic partners shall have the same rights, protections, and benefits, and shall be subject to the same responsibilities, obligations, and duties under law,” whatever their source, “as are granted to and imposed upon spouses.” AB 205 further admonishes that it “shall be construed liberally in order to secure to eligible couples who register as domestic partners the full range of legal rights … as the laws of California extend to and impose upon spouses.”

On behalf of Thomasson and CCF, Liberty Counsel argued when the people voted to for Proposition 22 to preserve marriage they intended to preserve more than just a label. AB 205 especially mimics marriage except in name only. Judge McMaster’s decision is an insult to the will of the people.

Staver noted: “Marriage is more than just a label. Marriage is a special, substantive, and unique relationship which the state has enacted laws to preserve. Marriage, as the union of one man and one woman, is the foundation of society and our future. This battle is far from over. We will appeal this all the way to the California Supreme Court. The will of the people cannot be disenfranchised by the stroke of a pen. The people have spoken and the courts must respect their decision.”