Polling Numbers Giving Freedom to Marry Ballot Efforts Advantage as Election Day Approaches
With less than a week until Election Day, ACLU affiliates and their coalition partners in states with questions regarding marriage for gay and lesbian couples on the ballot are intensifying their efforts to make history next week. In Maine, Maryland and Washington, voters have the opportunity to expand the freedom to marry to same-sex couples; and Minnesota voters could make that state the first ever to defeat a constitutional amendment defining marriage as between one man and one woman. Polling data in each of the four states is encouraging, but close. As we near the finish line, thousands of volunteers and coalition staffers are working hard to ensure that all loving, committed couples can marry. Here’s a round up of what’s happening on the ground:
Maine – 200,000 conversations on the freedom to marry; 50,000 more to come!
Latest public polling from Public Policy Polling shows Question One gaining 52 percent amongst Maine voters. Other polls have placed support higher at 57 percent. While these polls are encouraging, the is working hard with Mainers United for Marriage to achieve the freedom to marry for same-sex couples in our state. To date, campaign staff and volunteers have had over 200,000 one-on-one conversations and are planning to have another 50,000 between now and Election Day.
Steve Abbott, Maine Republican for Marriage
The ACLU of Maine has worked to engage diverse support, including the support of Republicans. Last week, the ACLU of Maine partnered with Mainers United to host two final press events with supportive Republicans from around the state. Their support adds a unique perspective to the debate about same-sex marriage.
Steve Abbott, former candidate for Governor, added his name to a list of nearly 1,000 Republicans United for Marriage. he said, "As a Republican, I value personal responsibility and believe that the family is the foundation of our community. That's why I support the freedom to marry for all, loving committed couples in Maine.”
Maryland – Revealing the truth about our opponents’ misleading ads.
The in Maryland shows that 52 percent of voters support – which would allow gay and lesbian couples to get civil marriage licenses – while only 43 percent oppose it. But we expect our opponents, including the National Organization for Marriage, to push even harder at the last minute to create negative and false ads and raise the money to put them on air.
But there is great work being done to counter the opposition's misinformation campaign. The ACLU of Maryland has launched a new website, "," which provides accurate legal information about the Civil Marriage Protection Act and serves as a fact-checker for misleading TV and radio ads.
In addition, the Baltimore Sun recently did some great fact-checking too, in an editorial published in response to Baltimore Ravens football player Matt Birk's reasons for opposing marriage equality. : "Question 6 is about whether we recognize committed same-sex couples to be equal in society. That will protect children and strengthen the institution of marriage."
We’re confident that when voters get the real facts and truth about Question 6, that they will support fairness and equality and vote FOR Question 6!
Washington – Leading the nation towards the freedom to marry.
With ballots due in less than a week, the race concerning Referendum 74 is a tight one. The latest Elway poll shows voter approval at 49 percent, and opposition at 45 percent. We have always known that this would be a close race. Washington state has a chance to make history with this vote and lead the nation in affirming the freedom to marry for gay and lesbian couples. Right now, the job of all of the dedicated staff and amazing volunteers working for marriage equality is to stay disciplined and focused. This final push will build on the momentum we've established and bring victory to the state. Those who support marriage equality have the most important jobs of all: voting. After all, the most important poll happens in the Elections Office.
The campaign has received support from local community and political leaders. Bob Shimabukuro, a local writer and historian, that speaks very personally about his family experience as well as what he witnessed while he was Director at Asian Pacific AIDS Council. "Marriage is not simply a two-person thing. It's a family affair. That's why I believe R74 will be approved. And it will be approved because of the Asian-American vote, not in spite of it."
State Representative Phyllis Gutierrez Kenney and former Seattle City Council member Martha Choe co-authored that reminds us of Washington state's history as a national marriage equality leader in the 1930's and urges voters to take the lead again by Approving Referendum 74. With ballots due in less than a week, voters have the opportunity to make history and resume our role as a national leader for the freedom to marry.
Minnesota – Many voices on the freedom to marry continue to push polls in our favor.
Polling is leaning in our favor, but we still have work to do! released in early October by Public Policy Polling have us ahead with 49 percent opposing the hurtful amendment and 46 percent supporting it.
What has helped us keep the poll numbers in our favor is that in Minnesota we have had many people tell their stories about why they are . They range from political figures like Former Vice President Walter Mondale, to to leaders of some of Minnesota’s top businesses. One of our personal favorites at the was written by former ACLU board member & former Minnesota legislator, Jack Davies. featured in Minnesota’s largest newspaper, The Star Tribune, spoke about the Minnesota Constitution and why it shouldn’t be used for exclusionary amendments like this one.
An even more personal and heartfelt story came from a young woman who wrote about being raised by two loving moms and what that meant to her. , Sarah Ann Baillie fondly remembers the influence her two moms had on her, saying: “In my family, I found an example of the kind of person I wanted to be and the values that I want to pass on to my children someday. Both of my moms -- individually, and together through their relationship -- have made central to their lives the work of creating a better future for their children and all children.”
As the negative attack ads start descending on us in Minnesota, it is important that we keep spreading the message every day that the foundation of any good relationship is that two people love each other and are committed to each other, and that this rings true for all couples.
Learn more about 2012 freedom to marry ballot initiatives: Sign up for breaking news alerts, , and .
Learn More About the Issues on This Page
-
Press ReleaseDec 2024
LGBTQ Rights
President Biden Must Veto Defense Bill Attacking Military Families with Transgender YouthPresident Biden Must Veto Defense Bill Attacking Military Families with Transgender Youth
WASHINGTON — The U.S. Senate today passed a version of the National Defense Authorization Act that would ban coverage for gender-affirming care for transgender youth whose parents are active-duty military personnel. The American Civil Liberties Union is opposing final passage of the defense bill over the inclusion of this health care ban and calling on President Joe Biden to veto the bill. Section 708 of the NDAA would prohibit insurance coverage for “medical interventions for the treatment of gender dysphoria” such as hormone therapy and puberty-suppressant medications, which Speaker Mike Johnson says would “permanently ban transgender medical treatment for minors.” The same treatments would be covered by TRICARE for any medical purpose other than treating gender dysphoria, the clinical diagnosis for the psychological distress experienced by transgender people related to their gender identity. “By passing this bill, the House and Senate are forcing thousands of active-duty service members to choose between their careers in the military and the future of their transgender children,” said Mike Zamore, national director of policy & government affairs at the ACLU. “This unconscionable and unjustifiable attack on those families stands in direct contrast to President Joe Biden’s legacy of defending the civil rights of transgender Americans — including when few in his own party showed the courage to do so. President Biden should cement his legacy by vetoing this bill and sending it back to Congress to pass without Speaker Johnson’s last minute health care ban for servicemembers’ kids.” If signed by President Biden, this health care ban would be the first new anti-LGBTQ provision enacted by Congress and signed into law by the president since the enactment of the military’s since-repealed “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy for LGBTQ servicemembers and the since-repealed federal law barring recognition of same-sex marriages known as the Defense of Marriage Act. It is unknown how many transgender youth are currently enrolled in TRICARE or how many of those enrolled are currently receiving coverage for gender-affirming care. In one 2022 analysis, 2,500 minor patients sought care for gender dysphoria through TRICARE Prime insurance at military or civilian treatment facilities in 2017, and 900 received puberty suppressants or gender-affirming hormones. Earlier this month, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a landmark case brought by the ACLU, the ACLU of Tennessee, Lambda Legal, and Akin Gump on behalf of three families and a medical provider challenging a Tennessee ban on gender-affirming hormonal therapies for transgender youth on the grounds the ban violates the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution. -
Press ReleaseDec 2024
LGBTQ Rights
Montana Court Blocks State From Refusing to Correct Sex Markers on Transgender People's Birth Certificates and Driver's LicensesMontana Court Blocks State From Refusing to Correct Sex Markers on Transgender People's Birth Certificates and Driver's Licenses
HELENA, Mont. – A Montana court has granted a preliminary injunction preventing the state of Montana from enforcing policies that bar transgender people from obtaining accurate sex designations on their birth certificates and driver’s licenses. After a prior restriction on amendments of birth certificates was struck down by the courts, in early 2024 the state of Montana enacted a new rule that categorically bars transgender Montanans from correcting the sex designation on their birth certificates. Around the same time, the Montana Department of Justice adopted a policy similarly restricting amendment of driver’s licenses. The plaintiffs challenged these policies in state district court, arguing that they violate various constitutional provisions, including the right to equal protection of the law. In a recent Montana Supreme Court decision, two justices concluded that discrimination on the basis of transgender status – as the state is engaging in here – is a form of sex discrimination that violates the Montana Constitution’s equal protection clause. The plaintiffs, two transgender women, are represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Montana, and Nixon Peabody LLP. Plaintiff Jessica Kalarchik, a veteran who served in the United States Army for 31 years, said: “After finally being able to live my life openly as the woman I know myself to be, I am frustrated that my birth state, Montana, wants me to carry around a birth certificate that incorrectly lists my sex as male. I live my life openly as a woman, I am treated as a woman in my daily life, and there is no reason I should be forced to carry a birth certificate that incorrectly identifies me as male. Fortunately, the court agrees that this ridiculous policy should not be in effect.” “Once again the State of Montana chose to adopt a draconian policy that is clearly intended to marginalize transgender Montanans, only for that discriminatory action to be blocked by the courts,” said Akilah Deernose, executive director for the ACLU of Montana. “Here in Montana we treasure our right to privacy and to live our lives free from governmental intrusion. The State of Montana clearly has not learned any lessons from the past few years, where courts have repeatedly struck down unconstitutional laws targeting transgender Montanans.” “Forcing anyone to carry documents that contradict their identity unjustly violates their rights to privacy, equal treatment, and not being compelled to convey a government message about their sex that they disagree with,” said Malita Picasso, staff attorney for the ACLU’s LGBTQ & HIV Project. “Such a policy marks transgender people for further mistreatment and discrimination, essentially requiring them to carry papers that out them as transgender any time they need to provide identity documents. Fortunately, the court has refused to allow the state of Montana to subvert the freedom of transgender Montanans to control their own identity as this case goes forward.” In granting the plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction, the court held, “[i]f the challenged state actions discriminate against transgender individuals on the basis of their transgender status, they also necessarily discriminate the basis of sex.” The state has the option of appealing the district court’s ruling to the Montana Supreme Court, but the underlying case will proceed in district court. A trial has not yet been scheduled. -
FloridaDec 2024
LGBTQ Rights
Keohane v. DixonKeohane v. Dixon
On September 30, 2024, the Florida Department of Corrections rescinded its policy regarding treatment of gender dysphoria, which allowed for hormone therapy when deemed medically necessary, as well as access to clothing and grooming standards that accord with one’s gender identity. Under this new policy, grooming and clothing accommodations have been stripped away, and hormone therapy is not permitted unless an exception is deemed constitutionally required. The ACLU brought a class action challenging the policy. -
IdahoDec 2024
LGBTQ Rights
Robinson v. LabradorRobinson v. Labrador
Two incarcerated transgender women have sued the state of Idaho alleging that HB 688, a 2024 law barring state funding for gender-affirming medical care for transgender people, denies them access to the health care their doctors have prescribed for them and is a violation of their Eighth Amendment right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment. They represent a class of all incarcerated folks within the state of Idaho who face the loss of hormone therapy due to HB 668.