Arizona lawmakers seek to strip domestic partners of health coverage

Arizona lawmakers are moving to take away health insurance coverage for the domestic partners of state and university employees. These rights were gained by domestic partners only one year ago.

About 750 workers would be affected says the Department of Administration. If put into affect, the state budget would define “dependents” …

Wisconsin Trial Court Dismisses ACLU Lawsuit Seeking Domestic Partner Benefits For Lesbian and Gay State Employees

But Issues Lengthy Decision Reasoning That It Is Unconstitutional For the State To Deny The Benefits

MADISON, WI – On Friday, a Wisconsin trial court dismissed a lawsuit brought by the American Civil Liberties Union on behalf of lesbian state employees and their partners seeking domestic partner health insurance and family leave protections. In a 46 page opinion, the court notes that although it believes it is unconstitutional for the state to continue to deny the employees equal health insurance coverage and family leave protection, it is bound by a prior decision from the Wisconsin Court of Appeals from 1992.
The Court’s opinion states: “The plaintiffs have offered a strong showing that the employment benefits in issue have been provided on a discriminatory basis. The defendants’ explanations offered for the continuing discrimination against these plaintiffs are unpersuasive and inadequate.”
“Losing doesn’t get any better than this,” said Larry Dupuis, Litigation Director of the ACLU. “We knew we had an uphill battle in the trial court because of the earlier case. But the court agreed with us that discrimination based on sexual orientation should be subject to strict judicial review and that it is unconstitutional for the state to deny equal benefits.”
The Court also found that providing the benefits would not be barred by the anti-gay marriage amendment that passed in 2006. After the amendment passed, the state had argued that the amendment barred the state from providing the benefits.

The ACLU filed the lawsuit in April 2005 on behalf of six lesbian state employees and their partners. The lawsuit charges that it is a violation of the state’s equal protection guarantees to deny lesbian and gay state employees access to the same health insurance and family leave protections that it provides to straight employees who are able to cover their spouses. The lawsuit was stalled for years because a number of Wisconsin municipalities tried to inject themselves into the lawsuit. The issue ultimately went up to the Wisconsin Supreme Court, which ruled that they were not entitled to become a party to the litigation.

Governor Jim Doyle has repeatedly stated that he would like to provide lesbian and gay state employees with equal health insurance coverage and included in his budget proposal a provision for domestic partner coverage.

“While we are heartened by the court’s decision, we urge the legislature to pass the domestic partner bill so there will be no need to appeal,” added Chris Ahmuty, Executive Director of the ACLU of Wisconsin. “Our clients are forced to pay expensive prices for inferior health coverage and sometimes even to forego necessary care. They suffer every day this issue goes unresolved.”

Wisconsin Department of Corrections employee Jayne Dunnum and her partner, Robin Timm, pay nearly $450 a month for private insurance for Timm who works on the couple’s organic farm and food store in Platteville. “We don’t care if it happens through the courts or the legislature. We just really need the health insurance coverage,” said Dunnum. “It’s a matter of basic fairness. I work just as hard has my straight colleagues and shouldn’t be denied the equal employment benefits.”

The case is Dunnum v. Department of Employee Trust Funds. The couples are represented by John Knight and Rose Saxe of the ACLU’s Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender Project, Larry Dupuis of the ACLU of Wisconsin, and cooperating attorneys Linda Roberson and Christopher Krimmer of the Madison law firm Balisle & Roberson.
Biographical information for all of the couples, today’s decision, the complaint, and additional information are available at http://www.aclu.org/getequal/caseprofiles.htm.

Published by

Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/06/wisconsin-tri…

Recognition of Out- of- State Marriages for Same-Sex Couples in Lambda Legal’s Case

‘Today the Appellate Court confirmed that New York’s state government follows the law by respecting out-of-state marriages of same-sex couples.’

(New York, January 22, 2009) — The New York Supreme Court Appellate Division, Third Department today upheld a lower court’s ruling that the New York State Department of Civil Service (DCS), a state agency, acted in compliance with the law when it confirmed that it would recognize out-of-state marriages of same-sex couples. This was the first Appellate Court ruling in New York to address the Paterson administration’s recognition of these marriages.
“Once an out-of-state same-sex marriage is recognized in New York,…each of its parties would be ‘a party to a marriage,’ and, thus, a ‘legal spouse’ who would be entitled to the benefits, rights and obligations of that status,” the three-judge majority opinion held. The other two panel judges filed a concurring opinion.
“Today the Appellate Court confirmed that New York’s state government follows the law by respecting out-of-state marriages of same-sex couples,” said Susan Sommer, Senior Counsel at Lambda Legal. “The Court has upheld important spousal health coverage for government employees in the process.”
In May 2007, DCS issued a memo recognizing, as spouses, same-sex couples married in other states or jurisdictions for purposes of extending spousal health insurance coverage to public employees in participating government insurance plans. The Alliance Defense Fund (ADF), on behalf of four New York taxpayer plaintiffs, challenged DCS’s authority to respect valid out-of-state marriages of same-sex couples and to treat those couples fairly in administering state benefits. In March of 2008, the Supreme Court, Albany County, issued a decision that the DCS was following the law in applying New York’s marriage recognition rule to these marriages. ADF opposed the decision in an appeal filed in 2008.
Lambda Legal argued before the court in October 2008 on behalf of Defendant-Intervenors-Respondents Peri Rainbow and Tamela Sloan, long-time public employees who are raising a special needs child adopted from foster care. The couple depends on the government protections that come from respect for their marriage, and today’s decision validated the lower court ruling that marriages such as theirs are lawfully respected in New York state.
Today’s decision is consistent with other marriage recognition victories in New York courts, as well as Governor Paterson’s May 2008 directive instructing all state agencies to respect out-of-state marriages of same-sex couples. In September 2008, the New York Supreme Court (Bronx trial court) dismissed a lawsuit against Governor Paterson challenging this directive and again granted Lambda Legal’s motion to intervene in the case on behalf of Rainbow and Sloan.
In February 2008, in Martinez v. County of Monroe, the Appellate Division, Fourth Department in Rochester, also upheld application of the marriage recognition rule to valid out-of-state marriages of same-sex couples. The decision, issued in response to a challenge brought by the NYCLU on behalf of a lesbian couple, is consistent with longstanding marriage recognition in New York.
In early 2009, Lambda Legal applauded a similar decision from the New York Appellate Division, Second Department affirming dismissal of a case brought by the ADF. The court confirmed that Westchester County Executive Spano lawfully recognized out-of-state marriages of same-sex couples, ruling as well in favor of Westchester County couple Michael Sabatino and Robert Voorheis, who had married in Canada and were permitted to intervene as defendants in the case with Lambda Legal as counsel.
Susan Sommer, Senior Counsel, is handling the case for Lambda Legal. She is joined by co-counsel
Kramer Levin Naftails & Frankel LLP.
The case is Lewis v. New York State Department of Civil Service, et al.