The FRC says enough signatures were collected to put ME’s marriage amendment on the ballot.

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…

Nevada governor follows through on threat to veto DP bill

CARSON CITY — As promised, Gov. Jim Gibbons on Monday vetoed the bill that would allow same- and opposite-sex couples to become legal domestic partners with many of the rights and privileges of married couples.

In his veto message, Gibbons said he rejected state Senate Bill 283 because it is contrary to the wishes of Nevada voters who in 2002 approved the Protection of Marriage constitutional amendment. That amendment stipulates a marriage may be between only a man and a woman.

But the governor said his veto should not be taken to mean he believes that “domestic partners are in any way undeserving of rights and protections.”

He said that on Saturday he signed a bill to prevent discrimination in public accommodations based on one’s sexual orientation.

“I am disappointed, but it wasn’t unexpected,” said state Sen. David Parks, D-Las Vegas, about the veto.

Parks, the bill’s sponsor, who is openly gay, said times have changed since the Protection of Marriage amendment, and some polls show strong public support for domestic partner legislation.

However, a Las Vegas Review-Journal poll conducted May 12-14 found that 50 percent of poll respondents opposed the proposal, with 38 percent favoring it and 12 percent undecided.

See * Nevada governor follows through on threat to veto DP bill
Las Vegas Review-Journal (5/26) Tags = gay men gay news lesbian news transgender bisexual

Published by

Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/05/nevada-govern…

Report shows Focus on Family both anti-jobs and anti-gay

The Colorado Independent, has broken a story of some interest to those following the money trail of the California anti-gay marriage amendment battle this past Nov. While many of us have focused on the impact of the Mormon Church on passage of the amendment, Ernest Luning has uncovered the impact of Focus on the Family. See Report shows Focus on Family both anti-jobs and anti-gay
Michigan Messenger, Michigan -