Phoenix, AZ – Attorney Chuck Blanchard said his client, Arizona
Together, has no problem with voters deciding whether
marriage should be constitutionally defined as being
between one man and one woman. But Blanchard said the
proposal also would bar civil unions as an alternative
to marriage, and would outlaw the benefits that some
cities and at least one county provide to the domestic
partners of their employees.
(The Arizona voters have a variety of opinions on each
of these topics. We believe they are entitled to vote
on each of these three topics separately.)
Blanchard said that is backed by rules which require
constitutional amendments to deal with only one
subject. Nathan Sproul, spokesman for Protect Marriage
Arizona, said there is only one subject -- defining
marriage and its benefits. He also noted that similar
challenges in other states have failed, most recently
in Georgia. But Lisa Hauser, another attorney for
initiative foes, said that is irrelevant.
(Their situation was very different. That action came
up after the voters had already voted. And their rule
is much, much different with respect to the separate
No date has been set for a hearing. In Phoenix, for
Arizona Public Radio this is Howard Fischer.