Question 2Constitutional amendment · Put on the ballot by lawmakers
Marriage equality constitutional protection
Explain it like I'm 5
Virginia's Constitution still has an old rule saying marriage is only between a man and a woman, even though courts stopped enforcing it. This would erase that rule and say two adults cannot be denied a marriage license because of sex, gender, or race.
Yes vote
Removing the old marriage definition and protecting marriage licenses and equal treatment for two adults regardless of sex, gender, or race.
No vote
Leaving the old one-man-and-one-woman language in Virginia's Constitution, although it is currently unenforceable under federal law.
The question to ask yourself
Should Virginia's Constitution explicitly protect marriage equality even though same-sex marriage is already legal?
The case for
- Removes outdated language that conflicts with current marriage law.
- Provides state constitutional protection if federal court precedent changes.
- Requires equal treatment of lawful marriages regardless of sex, gender, or race.
Backed by: Virginians for Marriage Equality, Equality Virginia, ACLU of Virginia, League of Women Voters of Virginia
The case against
- Some voters believe marriage should remain defined as between one man and one woman.
- Same-sex marriage is already legal, so opponents consider the amendment unnecessary.
- Some religious groups worry the amendment lacks explicit religious-exemption language.
Opposed by: Family Foundation of Virginia, Virginia Catholic Conference, Republican Party of Virginia
- Money
- No direct cost or tax effect is estimated in the cited sources.
- Don't be misled
- The claim that this amendment newly legalizes same-sex marriage is misleading because same-sex marriage is already legally protected; its main effect is removing outdated language and adding state protection.