|Elections in Virginia|
The Marshall-Newman Amendment also referred to as the Virginia Marriage Amendment is an amendment to the Constitution of Virginia that defines marriage as solely between one man and one woman and bans recognition of any legal status "approximat[ing] the design, qualities, significance, or effects of marriage". The amendment was ratified by 57% of the voters on November 7, 2006.
The text of the amendment states:
Only a union between one man and one woman may be a marriage valid in or recognized by this Commonwealth and its political subdivisions. This Commonwealth and its political subdivisions shall not create or recognize a legal status for relationships of unmarried individuals that intends to approximate the design, qualities, significance, or effects of marriage. Nor shall this Commonwealth or its political subdivisions create or recognize another union, partnership, or other legal status to which is assigned the rights, benefits, obligations, qualities, or effects of marriage.
Ruling of unconstitutionality
On February 13, 2014, US District Judge Arenda L. Wright Allen ruled that the amendment was unconstitutional, and ordered Virginia not to enforce it against same-sex couples. In her opinion, Judge Allen granted a stay pending appeal. Judge Wright Allen confused the Declaration of Independence for the US Constitution when stating on the first page of her opinion: "Our Constitution declares that 'all men' are created equal. Surely this means all of us." After considerable comment on this was made by several judicial observers, including South Texas College of Law professor Josh Blackman, Judge Wright Allen issued a second draft stating: "Our Declaration of Independence recognizes that ‘all men’ are created equal." 
The constitutional amendment was approved by the Virginia General Assembly and put on the November 2006 election ballot for approval by voters.
|Source: - Official Results|
Virginia appears to abridge gay individuals' right to enter into private contracts with each other. On its face, the law could interfere with wills, medical directives, powers of attorney, child custody and property arrangements, even perhaps joint bank accounts. If a gay Californian was hit by a bus in Arlington, her medical power of attorney might be worthless there.
Virginia Attorney General Bob McDonnell issued a 2006 opinion stating that the amendment does not change the legal status of documents such as contracts, wills, or advance health care directives between unmarried people.
- "Proposed Constitutional Amendment, Article I, Section 15-A" (PDF). Virginia State Board of Elections. November 2006. Retrieved December 30, 2006.
- "Official Results, 2006 election". Virginia State Board of Elections. Retrieved December 30, 2006.
- Wright Allen, Arenda L. (February 13, 2014). "Bostic, London, Schall & Townley v. Rainey & Schaeffer". Retrieved February 14, 2014.
- Cox, Carmen (February 14, 2014). "Va. Judge Confuses Constitution, Declaration of Independence in Gay Marriage Ruling". Retrieved February 22, 2014.
- Rauch, Jonathan (June 13, 2004). "Virginia's New Jim Crow". The Washington Post. Retrieved January 13, 2007.
- McDonnell, Robert (September 14, 2006). "Opinion number 06-003" (PDF). Attorney General of Virginia. Retrieved February 25, 2012. "It is my opinion that passage of the marriage amendment will not affect the current legal rights of unmarried persons involving contracts, wills, advance medical directives, shared equity agreements, or group accident and sickness insurance policies, or alter any other rights that do not "approximate the design, qualities, significance, or effects of marriage", or create "the rights, benefits, obligations, qualities, or effects of marriage.""