Connecticut Mulls Gay Marriage Case

Connecticut Mulls Gay Marriage Case
By STEPHANIE REITZ
Copyright by The Associated Press
Monday, May. 14, 2007


Connecticut's Supreme Court justices asked a lawyer on Monday how the traditional definition of marriage could be changed to include same-sex couples as they heard arguments urging them to legalize gay marriage there.

"How can it reasonably be done or logically be done to sort of delink the long-standing, deeply held institutional aspect of marriage, that it's a union between a man and a woman, and then define marriage as something other than that for purposes of this argument?" Justice Richard Palmer asked.

Connecticut already offers civil unions, but eight gay couples, unhappy with the civil unions law, are suing over the state's refusal to grant them marriage licenses. They say the marriage law is unconstitutional because it applies only to heterosexual couples and denies gay couples the financial, social and emotional benefits of marriage.

Attorneys on both sides say a decision in the couples' favor could have nationwide implications for states that have adopted or are considering civil union-like legislation.

Plaintiff's attorney Bennett Klein told the court Monday that the fundamental principles of marriage are not based on gender. "It is really a relationship of two legal equals based on mutual consent by which they take responsibility for each other, and that relationship is protected by the state," he said.

Assistant Attorney General Jane Rosenberg argued that the state's 2005 civil unions law gives the couples the equality they seek under state law. "This court is not grappling with the question whether same-sex couples should be granted all the rights and benefits of marriage, because all those rights and benefits, at least under state law, have now been granted," Rosenberg said.

She said the question really should be: "Is the Legislature constitutionally required to use the word marriage when it's referring to the package of rights and benefits it has given to same-sex couples. And the answer is clearly no." The justices aren't expected to issue a ruling until later this year.

Currently, only Massachusetts allows same-sex couples to marry. Connecticut, Vermont, California, New Jersey, Maine and Washington have laws allowing either civil unions or domestic partnerships, with New Hampshire set to join in January. Hawaii extends certain spousal rights to same-sex couples and cohabiting heterosexual pairs. The Connecticut couples who sued have been together between 10 and 32 years and say civil unions are inferior to marriage and violate their rights to equal protection and due process.

Married couples have federal rights related to taxes, Social Security beneficiary rules, veterans' benefits and other laws that people in civil unions don't have. Because civil unions aren't recognized nationwide, other rights, such as the ability to make medical decisions for an incapacitated partner, disappear when couples cross state lines.

The couples' claim was dismissed last year by a judge who said they received the equality they sought when Connecticut passed its civil unions law. The couples appealed. Their lawsuit names state Department of Public Health and the Madison town clerk's office, which denied marriage licenses to the couples based on state Attorney General Richard Blumenthal's advice.

A bill is pending in Connecticut's legislature to approve same-sex marriage, but leaders of the Judiciary Committee say they want to pull it from consideration this session because they do not believe enough lawmakers would vote to approve it. Republican Gov. M. Jodi Rell, who signed the civil unions bill into law, has said she would veto a gay marriage bill.
Associated Press writer Susan Haigh in Hartford contributed to this report.