Montana High Court Says University System Must Provide Gay Employees with Domestic Partner Benefits

http://www.proudparenting.com/page.cfm?typeofsite=snippetdetail&ID=1737&snippetset=yes ^

[jasoncann]

(Missoula, MT) - In a lawsuit brought by the American Civil Liberties Union, the Montana Supreme Court has ruled that the state must provide lesbian and gay employees of the University of Montana System with the option of purchasing health insurance and other employee benefits for their domestic partners. "This is an incredible victory for the lesbian and gay employees of the University of Montana System who need to protect their families just like their straight colleagues do," said Scott Crichton, Executive Director of the ACLU of Montana. "The court has said that same-sex couples who form committed relationships can no longer be denied the same protections and benefits that it affords different-sex couples."

The court, in a four-to-three decision, ruled that the University System's policy of excluding lesbian and gay employees from equal employment benefits violates the state constitution's equal protection guarantees.

In a concurring opinion, Judge James C. Nelson writes, "[T]he equal protection clause states that ‘No person' shall be denied the equal protection of the laws. The language is clear and unambiguous. ‘No person' means simply that - there is no language in this clause excepting out of this guarantee gay and lesbians. At least our society has not come to the position that homosexuals are not even to be considered as persons."

Carol Snetsinger and Nancy Siegel are two of the plaintiffs represented by the ACLU. They have been in a committed relationship for more than eight years. Snetsinger works in the biology department at the University of Montana, Missoula, and Siegel is a physical therapist. Due to the small size and limited purchasing power for health care of the place where Siegel works, she has no access to group insurance through her employer and has been forced to purchase private insurance that is inferior to and much more expensive than coverage that the married university employees are able to purchase for their spouses.

"We are ecstatic about this decision. It's been a long wait, and now we're thrilled that gay and lesbian employees of the University System will be able to insure their families," said Snetsinger. "I was moved to tears when I heard the decision. It's an incredible way to end this year."

The ACLU brought the lawsuit in February 2002 on behalf of two lesbian couples and PRIDE, Inc., a Montana based lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender advocacy organization whose members include employees and domestic partners of employees of the University of Montana System. The lawsuit charged that it was unconstitutional to deny same-sex couples access to health insurance, disability coverage and other benefits available to married employees and even to committed opposite-sex couples that signed an affidavit of common law marriage.

"This is truly a landmark decision," said Holly Jo Franz, one of the attorneys who argued the case. "The court has made it clear that same-sex couples must be respected."

[jasoncann]

By the way look at who the Corporate Sponsor is...

[Uncle Miltie]

Can you say "Constitutional Amendment?"

I knew you could.

[NewRomeTacitus]

CapitalOne, huh?

"What's in your wallet?" In these people's case it better be a condom.

[joesnuffy]

But what is it that the "we the people" of Montana want...none of the policy makers bothers to care what the people want..

The ACLU needs to be put out of business

[lilylangtree]

We gotta get rid of these judges! The American judicial system reeks of these "making new law" judges.

[monkeywrench]

The taxpayers have no say.

[fr_freak]

In a concurring opinion, Judge James C. Nelson writes, "[T]he equal protection clause states that ‘No person' shall be denied the equal protection of the laws. The language is clear and unambiguous. ‘No person' means simply that - there is no language in this clause excepting out of this guarantee gay and lesbians. At least our society has not come to the position that homosexuals are not even to be considered as persons."

Either these people are incapable of logical thinking, or they are being deliberately dishonest.

Applying marriage laws equally to all people means that gays and lesbians can enter into marriage just as easily as any other citizen. However, it is that definition of marriage which bars them from marrying members of the same sex. They are quite free to marry members of the opposite sex as well as anyone else. So, this decision has nothing to do with providing equal protection of the law, but instead it redefines the legal term of marriage, a purely legislative act and one not authorized to the judicial branch. That is a very clear usurpation of power.

[Area51]

Oh I say otherwise. I'm beating someone in Montana doesn't think kindly of supporting queers.

I suspect there will soon be a Patition drive to change the State Constitution.

[jasoncann]

And I'll bet you 99.9% of the Montana population does not know about this article.

[ken5050]

Montana's legislature is Dem, as are the top 5 elected officials...that's what happens when you're tooooo close to Canada, I guess..

[sgtbono2002]

This is what its all about folks, First Medical insurance that will break the Health Care companies by having to pay for Aids treatments , Then the pensions that will break the pension systems.

[GovernmentShrinker]

I look forward to the day that employees will be compensated with their wages or salaries, and left to purchase whatever "benefits" they want, for whomever they want, with their own money. Until that day, however, a government entity has no business giving extra compensation to some employees, but not to others, and should be required to provide additional health insurance to any members of all employees' households -- children, elderly parents, nannies, married or unmarried "significant others", etc.

[microgood]

In this state (WA) they advertise in the paper to get domestic partner benefits. People sign up total strangers for the benefits and take part of the cut. Our governor authorized this for state employees a few years back and the cost to the employee for health insurance went up by about 70% all at once.

[L98Fiero]

So, how do they prove they are gay in order to recieve these benefits? Could my roomate get benefits even though we aren't gay? We are still domestic parters.

[Myrddin]

Take the money for the "domestic partnership" benefits from the court budget. If the robbers in black robes decree it, they can pay for it.

[cyberaxe]

.....the ACLU can even screw up a place as nice as Missoula.....

.....my son is home for CHRISTMAS vacation from UM.....

.....he tells me that the locals are good old regular folks up there.....

.....but the campus is crawling with left wingers.....

.....shame.....