Knight v. Superior Court of Sacramento County, Court of Appeal of the State of California, Third Appellate District, April 5, 2005 [rejecting the contention that California's domestic partnership law violates the state Defense of Marriage Act passed by voters in 2000 as Proposition 22]. Excerpt:

the plain and unambiguous language of Proposition 22 shows that the initiative was intended only to limit the status of marriage to heterosexual couples and to prevent the recognition in California of homosexual marriages that have been, or may in the future be, legitimized by laws of other jurisdictions. The words of Proposition 22, and also its ballot pamphlet materials, do not express an intent to repeal our state's then-existing domestic partners laws or to limit the Legislature's authority to enact other legislation regulating such unions. If this were the intention of proponents of Proposition 22, the electorate was not given the opportunity to vote on that undisclosed objective, and courts are precluded from interpreting Proposition 22 in a manner that was not presented to the voters.

Read the full text of the opinion [PDF]. Reported in JURIST's Paper Chase here.