A California lawmaker and a non-profit group are suing Gov. Gray Davis for allegedly usurping the rights of Californians by signing a bill that awards virtually all the rights of marriage to same-sex partners.

State Senator William Knight and the Proposition 22 Legal Defense and Education Fund argue bill AB 205 – signed Friday at the San Francisco Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Community Center – nullifies many aspects of Proposition 22, a ballot initiative approved three years ago by a 2-1 margin.

The initiative, passed in March 2000, said marriage in California is valid only between one man and one woman.

"California voters have spoken and they don't want marriage hijacked by Governor Davis or anyone else," said Vincent McCarthy, director of the Center for Marriage Law, a non-profit group backing the lawsuit.

McCarthy asserted Davis' action "shows crass contempt for democracy in California."

"More than 60 percent of the voters said they want marriage to be between one man and one woman, and they don't want Davis trampling that decision made by the democratic process," he said.

The Florida-based legal defense group Liberty Counsel is expected to file a similar suit today.

Knight's lawsuit also is being supported by the Arizona-based Alliance Defense Fund.

ADF counsel Bob Tyler, a California resident, said "the governor may believe that voters should be ignored, but we're here to say the California constitution and the rule of law still matter."

The lawsuit argues that when Davis signed AB 205 into law, he contravened the purpose and intent of Proposition 22, which now is a part of the Family Code.

"The family is the building block of our society. Marriage between one man and one woman is the foundation of the family," Karen England of the Sacramento-based Capitol Resource Institute said. "It is imperative that traditional marriage be preserved. Our children should not be subject to a radical, new social experiment of legitimizing 'gay marriage.'"

Opponents of AB 205 point out the new law conflicts with Proposition 22 because, according to the California Legislative Counsel's digest, it "would extend the rights and duties of marriage to persons registered as domestic partners."

Supporters of the bill insist it does not infringe on the voter initiative because domestic partners cannot file joint state or federal tax returns, and many other federal obstacles prevent same-sex marriages.

AB 205's sponsor, Assemblywoman Jackie Goldberg, called the lawsuit a fundraising stunt by opponents of homosexual marriage.

"They already know they'll lose the lawsuit," she said, according to the Contra Costa Times. "This is not gay marriage. If it were, I'd be very happy."

The plaintiff's request for a preliminary injunction, asking to hold off implementing the law until the full case can be heard, is scheduled Oct. 15.

The law goes into effect Jan. 1, 2005.

The Alliance Defense Fund and its allies have won similar suits against challenges to marriage laws.

Courts in Minnesota, Massachusetts and Pennsylvania, for example, have ruled against provision of employee benefits to domestic partners.

ADF also is involved in cases in Arizona, New Jersey, Maine, Nebraska and Florida.

Campaign for California Families, a family issues group that led an effort against AB 205, asked gubernatorial recall candidates to sign a Marriage Protection Pledge, promising to protect the benefits and privileges of marriage for a husband and a wife. State Sen. Tom McClintock was the only candidate to sign.

"Gray Davis and Cruz Bustamante have conspired to bring homosexual 'marriage' to California, disobeying the clear orders of the people," said Randy Thomasson, the group's executive director.

Previous stories:

California Senate OKs 'virtual gay marriage'

'Virtual gay marriage' bill passes

California 'gay' caucus pushes 'marriage'

Related offer:

WND probe exposes 'gay' rights' secret agenda