Like anyone happily in love, Juan Camacho was over the moon when his boyfriend of eight years, Justin Keller, finally proposed in 2013.
But when the rush wore off, ambivalence quickly crept in.
Camacho recalls his answer: “‘Well, it's not legal in California. … Until it's legal, what's the point?’”
He tells KCRW, “If my own home state isn't going to recognize my marriage, then why would I do it?”
The couple discussed the idea of hosting a destination wedding in a state that would marry two men. But Camacho said no — why would he travel thousands of miles to get married, only for it to be null and void when he flew back? Eventually, the two settled on tying the knot when gay marriage was finally legalized in the state of California.
Today, same-sex marriage in the Golden State is legal. But it’s back on the 2024 state ballot – Proposition 3 would codify the right for same-sex couples to get married in the state of California. Most importantly: It would also repeal and replace existing language in the state constitution that defines marriage as between a man and a woman only.
Why is this now a question for voters?
Check out more of KCRW’s coverage on the 2024 election
To understand why that “zombie” language is in the books in the first place, you have to go back to the early 2000s. Same-sex marriage was only legal in one state: Massachusetts. In California, it was banned under state and federal law.
But on February 12, 2004 — just weeks after he was elected mayor of San Francisco – Gavin Newsom defied the law and announced he would allow same-sex couples to get married. In total, about 4,000 couples tied the knot in February and March during a period now known as the “Winter of Love.”
The ceremonies caught international attention, and faced legal backlash and moral uproar. Then-President George W. Bush said he was “troubled” by the work of “activist judges” in San Francisco, and even vocalized support for a federal constitutional amendment that would ban gay marriage. In August 2004, the “Winter of Love” marriages were annulled by the California Supreme Court.
Then in 2008, Proposition 8 was added to the California ballot. It allowed voters to amend the state constitution to define marriage as “between a man and a woman only.” Its supporters painted the ballot initiative as a moral issue — one that protected the sanctity of marriage, the education system, and children.
In November 2008, California voters passed the measure 52% to 48%.
Brad Sears, the executive director of the William’s Institute, UCLA’s LGBT policy center, recalls “walking into my local coffee place the day after the election in 2008 and just having this feeling that a little more than half the people around me voted against my right to marry, voted against my right to be seen as an equal citizen.”
Camacho felt that sentiment reflected back at him too: “It does hit you like a brick wall and you're like, ‘Whoa. Maybe we're not as far ahead as I thought we were.’”
He continues, “You question everything. You question whether you know what society thinks of you.”
Eventually a series of legal battles at the state and federal level invalidated Proposition 8, and in 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriage nationwide. Less than a decade later, Congress also recognized the right in the Respect for Marriage Act.
But that Prop 8 sentence about marriage in California being only for straight couples? It’s still on the books, because a ballot initiative that changes the California constitution can only be revoked by another ballot initiative that undoes the damage.
So why now?
Proposition 3’s proponents see the measure as an insurance policy for California’s same-sex couples in the aftermath of the U.S. Supreme Court overturning the nationwide right to an abortion.
Sears points to comments from one SCOTUS justice in particular, who hinted other rights could be next: “Clarence Thomas said he would not only overturn Roe v. Wade, but called into question any decision based on fundamental rights based on the right to privacy, which include rights around contraception, interracial marriage, and same-sex marriage.”
The latest polling from the Public Policy Institute of California shows that 70% of likely voters plan to support Prop 3. Sears adds that this upcoming election will help “heal an injury” from the Prop 8 vote, sending a powerful message of acceptance to LGBTQ+ Californians.
Camacho, who is celebrating his 10-year wedding anniversary, says bring on the vote.
“I'm ready for my fellow Californians … to affirm that 2008 was a fluke and that we really have moved beyond this question of whether same-sex individuals can get married — that it is a celebration because we're celebrating love.”