Oregon's anti-domestic partner measure fails

Oregon's anti-domestic partner measure fails

Bob Egelko, Chronicle Staff Writer

Friday, August 15, 2008


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Print E-mail del.icio.us
Digg
Technorati
Reddit
Facebook Slashdot
Fark
Newsvine
Google Bookmarks
Share Comments (4) Georgia (default)
Verdana
Times New Roman
ArialFont | Size:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Domestic partnership rights for same-sex couples in Oregon remained intact Thursday as a federal appeals court upheld state election officials' findings that a referendum to repeal the partnership law had fallen 96 signatures short of qualifying for the November ballot.

The law, passed last year, made Oregon one of nine states to give legal recognition to same-sex unions. It provides registered partners with the same benefits held by married couples under state law, including property and inheritance rights and hospital visitation. It does not include federal marriage benefits, such as Social Security and immigration rights and joint federal tax filing.

The law is similar to California's domestic partner law. The California partnership law offers same-sex couples an alternative to marriage, a right they won in a May 15 state Supreme Court ruling that could be overturned by a November ballot initiative. Unlike the Oregon partnership law, which applies only to same-sex couples, the California law is also open to opposite-sex couples in which one partner is at least 62.

About 2,500 Oregon couples have signed up since the law took effect in February, said Karynn Fish, spokeswoman for the gay rights group Basic Rights Oregon.

"This means these 2,500 committed couples can finally get on with their lives and not have to worry about whether their rights will be suddenly taken away," she said.

Attorney Austin Nimocks of the Alliance Defense Fund, a conservative Christian organization representing sponsors of the referendum, said the ruling disenfranchised Oregonians whose signatures weren't counted.

"The people didn't thwart this effort, government bureaucracy did," he said.

The law was signed in May 2007 and was due to take effect in January, but a federal judge put it on hold for a month while considering opponents' challenge to state election officials' refusal to place their referendum on the November ballot.

Needing 55,179 valid signatures, sponsors of the referendum turned in 62,000 signatures on petitions to election officials, who followed standard procedures by examining a random sample. After invalidating signatures that didn't match those on registration cards, they concluded that only 55,083 valid signatures had been submitted.

The judge upheld the signature-counting process on Feb. 1 and was affirmed Thursday by a three-judge appeals court panel, which said Oregon took reasonable measures to validate petition signatures.

Sponsors of the referendum argued that election officials should have notified voters whose signatures were rejected and given them a chance to prove their identity. But the court said county registrars are trained in signature verification, allow sponsors of a ballot measure to attend the counting sessions and challenge their decisions, and refer all rejected signatures to a second elections official for added scrutiny.

The ruling is Lemons vs. Bradbury