Anti-LGBT Constitutional Amendment FAQ

What the Original Amendment Language Did: The first sentence of the Amendment, which remains unchanged, does not simply place this state’s current statutory prohibition of same-sex marriage into the North Carolina Constitution. Instead, it prohibits state recognition or validation of “domestic legal unions” except marriage.  In doing this, the proposed Senate bill would introduce into the Constitution a phrase that has never been used in any prior law in North Carolina, never been interpreted by its courts, and never been interpreted by courts in any other state.

The bar on “domestic legal unions” would clearly ban relationship rights beyond same-sex marriage: at the very least, it would also bar recognition of civil unions, as well as the domestic partnerships now offered to public employees in some municipalities.  The vagueness of this language and the absence of its use in prior law, however, mean that courts might interpret it far more broadly to upend completely the very minimal legal rights, obligations, and protections now available to unmarried couples, whether same-sex or opposite-sex. In the absence of revisions, this could have precluded not only public benefits to unmarried couples, including municipalities’ domestic partnership programs, but also the enforcement of agreements between unmarried couples, of domestic partnership benefits from private employers to their employees, as well as a host of other rights that stem from non-marital relationships, including domestic violence protections for unmarried couples.

What the Revised Language Does:  The revised version invalidates some of the possible broad readings of the Amendment’s scope.  In stating that the Amendment does not prohibit private contracts between parties or courts from adjudicating these contracts, the Amendment makes clear that courts can enforce legal agreements between unmarried partners.  In addition, the Amendment would ensure that private employers could continue to give domestic partnership benefits to employees.

What the Revised Language Doesn’t Do:  The revised language only limits broad readings of the original sentence’s vague and untested language that pertain to private contracts. It does nothing to preclude the possibility that courts will read that language to invalidate other rights and obligations connected with the relationships of unmarried partners that do not involve contracts.  For example:

• The Amendment still has the potential to invalidate domestic violence protections for members of unmarried couples, as an Ohio court did with even narrower language in its state’s marriage amendment.
• The Amendment could still interfere with existing child custody and visitation rights that seek to protect the best interests of children.
• The revision does not preclude courts from reading that language to invalidate trusts, wills, and end-of-life directives – which are not “private contracts” – in favor of an unmarried partner. 
• Further, the revision would still invalidate domestic partner benefits now offered by several municipalities. 

What do we call it?

We call it what it is: "the anti-LGBT amendment or "the anti-gay* amendment."  It's not about "defending" anyone's marriage. It's an attack on LGBT North Carolinians.

What are our key arguments against the amendment?

* We sometimes use "gay" in our public messaging when we mean LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender) because not enough people know what LGBT means. We're starting with what's familiar to most North Carolinians so we reach as many folks as possible.

 What Can I do to Stop the Amendment?