[gidget7]

That's just it, this is amending the constitution, without benefit of an amendment. CT Constitution is clear on marriage. Without an amendment, which is to be voted on by the people, this law is unconstitutional.

I was born and raised in CT, have only lived outside CT a year or so. It appears Rell is no better than Rowland was, but I am not that surprised.

[Phantom Lord]

I know little to nothing about CT. If the CT constitution clearly defines marriage as between one man and one women and this legislation is an amendment to the constitution and the citizens of CT must vote on constitutional amendments, then yes, the peoples vote is required.

If it does not meet those criteria, then a vote of the people is not required.