Posted on April 7, 2009 by Robert A. Epstein

VERMONT BECOMES FOURTH STATE TO LEGALIZE SAME-SEX MARRIAGE

After becoming the first state to legalize civil unions, Vermont has become the fourth state to legalize same-sex marriage. Today, both houses of the state legislature overrode the governor’s recent veto of the proposed same-sex marriage bill. Notably, it was the first state to do so via legislative vote, as same-sex marriage in Massachusetts, Connecticut and Iowa was legalized via judicial determination. 

This enormous victory for same-sex couples comes on the heels of the Iowa Supreme Court’s decision last week striking down a state law banning same-sex marriage. It remains to be seen whether New Jersey, which has legalized civil unions, will follow suit.  Governor Corzine recently indicated that he would sign a bill legalizing same-sex marriage should one reach his desk.  Stay tuned into this blog for future updates in this fast developing area of the law.

Tags: , , , , ,
Posted on March 3, 2009 by Robert A. Epstein

SUIT TO BE FILED FOR EXTENSION OF FEDERAL BENEFITS TO SAME-SEX COUPLES

The rapid fire developments in the area of same-sex rights continues, with word from the Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders group, which successfully argued for same-sex marriage in Massachusetts, that it intends to file suit in Massachusetts seeking some federal benefits for spouses in a same-sex marriage.  The plaintiffs in the suit would be eight couples and three widowers who were each married in Massachusetts once it was legalized in 2004 and subsequently denied provision of federal benefits granted to married couples upon application for same.

While the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) prohibits the federal government from recognizing same-sex marriage and, by correlation, granting to same-sex spouses certain federal benefits such as Social Security survivors' payments, the group believes that the suit is warranted per its belief that the number of states permitting same-sex marriage will increase beyond Massachusetts and Connecticut.  Specifically, the suit would target only a portion of DOMA, seeking equal protection for benefits including Social Security, federal income tax, federal employees and retirees, and the issuance of passports.  

Such a suit would be the first in which plaintiffs were legally married in their state of residence and then were subsequently denied requested federal benefits. 

EDITOR'S NOTE:  The basis of the suit is the equal protection clause of the US Constitution.  It will be interesting to see the outcome of this case, however, it may be years before it is decided.        Eric S. Solotoff

Tags: , , , , ,