DECEMBER 2i. 2w/
justout.
northwest
Lawsuit Could Delay Domestic Partnerships
Case seeks to reinstate anti-gay signatures
by Julie Sabatier
small but vocal group of Oregonians
opposed to the new domestic partner
ship law are still trying to prevent it
from taking effect Jan. 1, 2008.
The Alliance Defense Fund (ADF)
filed suit Dec. 3 against Secretary of State Bill
Bradbury and 12 county clerks on behalf of several
“disenfranchised signers” of Petition 303, which
would have referred House Bill 2007 to the
November 2008 ballot. At a hearing Dec. 28, Judge
Michael Mosman will hear oral arguments from the
ADF in support of a preliminary injunction, which
could stop the law from going into effect while the
case is pending.
Petition 303 would have resulted in a referen
dum of the domestic partnership law, had the ad
hoc group of signature gatherers collected 55,179
valid signatures. Of the 60,531 signatures gathered,
only 55,063 were considered legitimate. Despite its
unprecedented 90.97 validity rate, the group still
fell 116 signatures short.
Because the secretary of state checks a statisti
cal sampling of signatures against voter registration
cards and applies that to the entire number of
signatures, a total of five signatures stood between
the group and its goal. The lawsuit seeks to rein
state those signatures and retroactively refer the
domestic partnership law to the 2008 ballot.
To successfully argue for a preliminary injunction,
which would prevent the domestic partnership law
from taking effect right away, the ADF will have to
show that plaintiffs would incur “irreparable harm" if
the law took effect and that a strong likelihood exists
that the group will eventually win its case.
Unlike the nebulous, grassroots group responsi
ble for gathering signatures, the Scottsdale, Ariz.-
based ADF is a national organization with a sizable
budget. According to tax records obtained by Just
Out, the nonprofit garnered more than $25 million
in public support in 2005. The group was founded
in 1994 by religious leaders including James
Dobson of Focus on the Family. Its expressed
purpose is “to aggressively defend religious liberty.”
Its key issues are abortion, gay rights and the
religious freedom of American Christians.
“We generally know every piece of legislation,
local or state, that’s passed that falls within our
ministry scope,” said senior legal council Austin
Nimocks, who serves as lead council on the suit
against Bradbury.
The plaintiffs named in the suit are not the
familiar spokespeople from rhe referendum cam
paign, hut individual signers including Eugene
Arnautov, a contractor who attends First Slavic
Baptist Church in Salem. He said he’s not sure who
contacted him, but someone called to say his signa
ture was not valid and informed him of the lawsuit.
Arnautov added that he signed on because
Petition 303 was in line with his beliefs. “I think
marriage is just for one man and one woman, just
Dentistry In The Pearl That’s
Something To Smile About!
$74
New Patient Exam and X-Rays
$49
New Patient Basic Cleaning
(exam required)
$59
Children’s Exam and Cleaning
(new patients 12 & under)
$99
,
Professional Home Whitening
(exam required)
$299 In Office 1 Hour “Zoom”
Tooth Whitening (exam required)
(503) 546-9079
222 NW 10th Avenue
www.sundbergdentistry.com
a
A
V
■71
♦ ’ 1
' ÌI rer un far* .
and Sewier*
ON MACADAM
IN THE PEARL ON 10th
AT BRIDGEPORT VILLAGE
IN EUGENE AT
Sth ST. PUBLIC MARKET
www.lexidog.com
/
(Q
S
'
"V1
k JR - f* ■’
like the Bible says. There are not alterna
tives,” he said.
Plaintiff Paula Cedillo signed on for
similar reasons, although she also knew
little about the suit. “After I signed
[Petition .30311 started getting a few phone
calls from a gentleman. I can’t remember
his name,” said the stay-at-home mom.
“He’s the one that brought up the lawsuit.
1 told him I’ll do whatever it takes. He did
say he was with the group that got my
A difference of five signatures could prevent Oregon's
signature. We’re all on the same team.”
domestic partnership law from going into effect Jan. 1.
Nimocks said he didn’t know exactly
who had originally contacted the plaintiffs, but he
“The laws governing ballots and signatures on
claimed the ADF has signed agreements with
petitions are completely different. You can’t equate
everyone it is representing in the case.
them," said secretary of state spokesman Scott
The lawsuit, which will be paid for by the ADF,
Moore. “There are certainly similarities—they both
includes seven counts of violations against the
involve signatures—but they are different processes."
Oregon and U.S. Constitutions. The crux of the
The lawsuit details the myriad ways that signers
case lies in the argument that signers were not
attempted to reinstate their signatures, through
adequately notified when their signatures were e-mails, phone calls and presenting documentation
considered invalid. “Not only did they violate the
in person. “The policy is that in checking those sig
existing laws, but the laws themselves are also
natures, the only documents that county clerks can
unconstitutional,” said Nimocks.
use is the voter registration card," said Moore.
The lawsuit clearly and correctly states that
Bradbury is not threatened by the lawsuit,
under Oregon’s vote-by-mail system, voters are able
according to Moore. “We applied the exact same
to appeal to the secretary of state or the appropri procedure to the referendum petitions that we
ate county clerk when their ballot signature is ques apply to every other petition that gets dropped off
tioned. However, it glosses over the fact that the
at our office,” he said. “They simply didn’t have
same law does not apply to petition signatures.
enough ballot signatures."