Domestic Partnership Ruling Should Not Be Appealed
September 29, 2005
Tell the Attorney General, Governor Granholm and Your State Legislators to Give Benefits to Same-Sex Domestic Partners. Take Action Here!
On Tuesday, an Ingham County judge ruled that Proposal 2 does not prohibit public employers from providing benefits to same-sex domestic partners and their children. Governor Granholm would like to reinstitute the benefits package in state contracts, but some Michigan legislators are urging the state to appeal the court's decision.
During the campaign, proponents of Proposal 2 denied that the "marriage amendment" would put health benefits at risk. Now, the same forces behind Proposal 2 are claiming exactly the opposite.
The ACLU of Michigan filed suit in April after Attorney General Mike Cox issued a non-binding opinion stating that, under Proposal 2, the state of Michigan, public universities and Michigan cities were barred from providing health benefits to the families of their lesbian and gay employees.
This week, Judge Joyce Dragonchuk agreed with the ACLU, representing 21 same-sex couples and their families.
"[This] ruling affirms that Michigan voters never intended to take health insurance away from families,” said Deborah LaBelle, the lead attorney for ACLU of Michigan. “Employers, including the State of Michigan, can now continue to support fairness and equity in the workplace by offering domestic partner benefits. LGBT employees can also be assured that their partners and children will have access to health care.”
Urge the state to let the court's decision stand. Tell the Attorney General, Governor Granholm and Your State Legislators to Give Benefits Back to Same-Sex Domestic Partners. Take Action Here.