California Attorney General Kamala Harris has received an extension to prepare a title and summary for the so-called Sodomite Suppression Act – an initiative proposed by an Orange County attorney that calls for gays to be killed. But in a bizarre twist, the lawyer now indicates that he may bypass signature gathering and ask a judge to place it directly on the ballot. This is ridiculous.
Matthew McLaughlin, the attorney who authored the proposal and paid the $200 filing fee, has so far not responded to numerous media outlets that have sought comment from him since he made headlines a few months ago with what is obviously an unconstitutional initiative. It's par for the course for these anti-gay zealots: they often hide behind statements and proposals, and won't respond to basic questions. McLaughlin still isn't talking to reporters, but he apparently did write to Harris, telling her that if the AG's office refuses to "clear the Sodomite Suppression Act for signature circulation, I may demand as remedy that it be placed on the ballot directly."
What he means is that he'll go to court and try to get a judge to waive the signature requirements. That seems unlikely. For one thing, the act itself is a license to commit a crime – it's allowing for murder. For another, the proposal is, as Harris has stated, "utterly reprehensible." In fact, as we've reported, Harris has already filed court documents asking a judge to quash the initiative, and McLaughlin has so far not attempted to defend the Sodomite Suppression Act in court.
That's because there is no defense of it, and McLaughlin knows it. Whether he's really a raging homophobe or merely trying to pull a fast one on state voters, an initiative calling for citizens to kill fellow citizens because they are gay is morally wrong and, according to laws currently on the books, illegal.
Out lawmakers and their straight allies in the Legislature this week condemned the initiative. Led by San Mateo Assemblyman Kevin Mullin (D) and gay Assemblyman Evan Low (D-Campbell), and joined by lesbian Assemblywoman Susan Eggman (D-Stockton), San Francisco Democratic Assemblymen David Chiu and Phil Ting, and East Bay Assemblyman Tony Thurmond (D-Richmond), Assembly Concurrent Resolution 67 was introduced. It denounces and objects to ballot initiatives that call for violence, harm, and intimidation of another person due to that person's sexual orientation or gender identity.
It's rare that the Legislature takes a position on a proposed citizen ballot measure, but McLaughlin's Sodomite Suppression Act is so extreme and so outrageous that the lawmakers felt a public statement was necessary.
We agree. McLaughlin can't possibly defend such bigotry and hatred, and no judge should validate an initiative that does not serve the public interest, in addition to the obvious legal problems.
McLaughlin's proposal recalls another far-fetched idea that a Nebraska woman recently had. Sylvia Driskell, claiming to be an ambassador of God and Jesus Christ, filed a federal lawsuit against all gays, asking a judge to decide whether homosexuality is a sin. A few days later, Judge John Gerrard dismissed her suit, saying that federal court is not a forum "for debate or discourse on theological matters."
These frivolous stunts to promote hatred must not be given any credibility. We cannot allow these bigots to abuse the initiative process and the courts.