HRC To Corporations: Keep Domestic Partnerships After Same-Sex Marriage Becomes Legal Nationwide

Via press release from the Human Rights Campaign:

HRC research shows that two-thirds of Fortune 500 companies offer domestic partner benefits to employees with same-sex partners. And 62 percent of those companies also make domestic partner benefits available to employees with opposite-sex partners.

Companies that move to eliminate domestic partner benefits, and instead require legal marriage to ensure partner and family benefits, will be putting their employees’ family members -- including both same-sex and opposite-sex partners -- at risk of being uninsured. And they would also put scores of LGBT employees and their families who live in states without full non-discrimination protections at risk for discrimination in employment, credit, housing, and public accommodation.

“If an LGBT employee is, in effect, ‘outed’ by being required to obtain a public marriage license in a state that doesn’t provide explicit non-discrimination protections, it could place that employee and their family at risk of being denied credit, housing and public accommodation,” said HRC Legal Director Sarah Warbelow. “These core elements of daily life could be compromised for LGBT families, even in states that might honor their marriage license.”

Last month the Wall Street Journal reported that some major corporations including Verizon and Delta Airlines are already phasing out unmarried same-sex partner benefits in states where same-sex marriage is legal.

CHATTANOOGA: Voters Repeal Domestic Partners Ordinance In "Landslide" Result

Via Chattanooga television:

The Domestic Partnership ordinance loses in Chattanooga. With 100% of the vote reported: Against the Ordinance - 13685, For the Ordinance - 8184. Last year the Chattanooga City Council voted to allow the partners of city employees in domestic partnerships to get equal benefits. But the measure was forced to a public vote, and it appears the public disagrees with the 5-4 council vote. The measure would have provided health benefits to the same-sex partners of city employees. Following the vote Chattanooga Mayor Andy Berke said, “I have no doubt Chattanoogans value fairness and equality, and I am proud of the volunteers who spent nights and weekends to ensure our employees are treated equally. The City of Chattanooga’s non-discrimination ordinance was repealed tonight, but I want every City employee to know one thing -- your work is valued and you are important to the future of our community. Regardless of the results tonight, my Administration will continue to hire and promote the best people who provide excellent service to our constituents."

Chattanooga Tea Party President Mark West (seen above): "What we want them to take away from this is that the people have spoken."

The Human Rights Campaign reacts via press release:

"Despite this hurtful and disappointing result tonight, we know that fair-minded Chattanoogans and people across Tennessee are ready to keep fighting until full equality reaches every corner of the state and every corner of this country. As LGBT equality moves forward across this country, this work isn't over until every American can expect the same decent treatment under the law."

WISCONSIN: State Supreme Court Says Domestic Partners Law Is Constitutional

Via press release from Lambda Legal:

Today the Wisconsin Supreme Court upheld the state’s domestic partnership registry as constitutional, bringing a joyful end to a long legal battle by Lambda Legal on behalf of Fair Wisconsin and five intervening defendant couples. “We’re thrilled that Wisconsin same-sex couples can keep the limited but very important protections that the domestic partnership registry grants them,” said Christopher Clark, Counsel for Lambda Legal. “The statute is clearly constitutional, and the Supreme Court of Wisconsin agreed with us. Gay and lesbian couples in Wisconsin no longer have to fear that the protections they have will be taken away by unnecessary anti-gay legal action. “We also look forward to the day - fast approaching - when Wisconsin will join its neighbors to the south and west and the growing number of states across the country where same-sex couples have the freedom to marry, rendering limited domestic partnership registry unnecessary. Wisconsin same-sex couples are entitled to the full range of legal protections that only marriage provides,” Clark added.

The lawsuit was brought by Wisconsin Family Action, who claimed that the domestic partners registry, which granted hospital visitation rights among other items, violated the state's constitutional ban on same-sex marriage and "any legal status that is substantially similar to marriage."

TENNESSEE: Nashville Approves Partner Benefits For City Employees

In a lopsided vote, Nashville's Metro Council last night approved domestic partner benefits for city employees.

The council voted 27-7 for the measure, adding Metro to a long list of public and private employers across the country that offer domestic partner benefits. The result was expected, but some council members spoke out strongly against the policy before the vote. Councilman Bill Pridemore said his and his constituents' values would be "compromised" by the idea, and Councilman Phil Claiborne moved to defer the final vote indefinitely, citing budgetary concerns. But Councilman Lonnell Matthews moved to table Claiborne's motion, and the council agreed. Metro Finance Director Rich Riebeling said the financial impact of the policy would be small — $450,000 or so — within the $1.89 billion operating budget the council had passed moments earlier.

Nashville Mayor Karl Dean called it a "big day" for the city, adding, "If we believe that each person has value and we treat each other with respect, then I think this city will be in fine shape. I'm proud of the effort, I'm proud of our city and I'm proud of you all." (Tipped by JMG reader Jason)

MICHIGAN: Gov. Rick Snyder Asks Court To Uphold Ban On Same-Sex Benefits

GOP Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder has filed a motion asking a federal court to uphold a ban on domestic partner benefits for state and local government employees.

The motion asks Judge David Lawson to rule in favor of the state in a lawsuit filed by five same-sex couples. The motion argues that the 2011 law banning the benefits "eliminates local government programs that are irrational and unfair" and promotes "financially sound" local agencies. In June 2013, Lawson issued a preliminary injunction prohibiting the state from enforcing the law, Public Act 297, saying the plaintiffs in the case had a good chance of proving at trial that the law violates the equal protection guarantee of the U.S. Constitution.

RELATED: An unrelated suit for Michigan marriage equality is scheduled to have its opening arguments next week. Earlier this month the plaintiffs in that suit filed a motion demanding that discredited researcher Mark Regnerus be barred from testifying as an expert witness.

WASHINGTON: State To Convert All Domestic Partnerships To Marriages

Via the Seattle Times:

Thousands of gay and lesbian domestic partners who have not married or legally dissolved their unions by the end of June will have their relationships automatically converted to marriage — courtesy of the state. It’s the final piece of the state’s same-sex marriage law — a provision about which many couples are apparently unaware and one sure to trigger some uncomfortable conversations. Although domestic partnerships are essentially marriage by a different name, “people don’t think of them as the same thing ...” said Jason Holloway, president of QLaw Association, the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender bar association. Those being plunged into matrimony will no doubt include couples who simply hadn’t given it much thought.

Domestic partnerships became available in 2007 and an estimated 6500 couples remain so joined. The automatic June conversion to marriage does not apply to seniors, who may elect to remain in their domestic partnership.

Re-Freep This Chattanooga Poll

I guess they didn't appreciate yesterday's freeping because the Chattanooga Free Press has reposted their poll with slightly different wording. (Tipped by JMG reader Chuck)

CHATTANOOGA: Teabaggers Force Public Vote To Repeal LGBT Partners Benefits

From the Times Free Press:

The Hamilton County Election Commission has verified enough signatures on a petition to repeal the city's controversial domestic benefits ordinance. Mark West of the local PAC Citizens for Government Accountability and Transparency and president of the local tea party has already turned in 8,900 signatures and plans to turn in nearly 10,000 by the 4 p.m. deadline. County Administrator of Elections Charlotte Mullis-Morgan said the elections commission has already verified 4,500 signatures, the minimum amount needed as required by the city charter.

You know what to do.

(Tipped by JMG reader DS)

Freep This Wisconsin Poll

The haters are trying to repeal Wisconsin's domestic partners registry because it's "too close to marriage." The state Supreme Court heard opening arguments in the case yesterday.

Attorney Austin Nimocks, representing a group of citizens that challenged the law, told the justices the domestic partner registry follows the blueprint of marriage. Nimocks said the registry has restrictions on how old someone must be to enter into a domestic partner relationship and how closely related they are, while also prohibiting them from entering into another domestic partner relationship or a marriage. "This case is not about benefits," Nimocks said. "This case is rather about chapter 770 mimicking marriage's blueprint in the Wisconsin code, a blueprint which does not rise or fall on the extension of any particular benefit." During Wednesday's oral arguments, Justice Michael Gableman pressed both attorneys on the language supporters of the anti-gay marriage amendment used during the legislative debate and the run up to the 2006 referendum.

Nimocks works for the pedophile-friendly anti-gay group, the Alliance Defense Fund. Go freep today's poll in the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel. Try the main page on the lower right. (Tipped by JMG reader Jim)

TENNESSEE: Knoxville Mayor Orders City To Offer Domestic Partners Benefits

Saying that she does not need the permission of the city council to do so, Knoxville Mayor Madeline Rogero has ordered the city to expand domestic partner benefits to LGBT employees of the city.  

"Last year, we expanded our employee nondiscrimination ordinance to include sexual orientation and gender identity. This change in our benefits ensures that we are treating everyone fairly," Mayor Rogero said. "It will help us attract and retain the best City of Knoxville employees, regardless of their domestic situation." City officials with Chattanooga and Nashville are considering the change, as well. To be eligible for domestic partner benefits, an employee must fill out an affidavit about their committed relationship and show proof of financial interdependence. The city cautions that non-married couples, domestic partner benefits may be treated as taxable income by the Internal Revenue Service, so they encourage employees to research it and consider the tax implications.

RELATED: In August, the Tennessee town of Collegedale became the first in the state to offer domestic partner benefits. Knoxville is the second. (Tipped by JMG reader Mike)

Walmart Adds Insurance Benefits For Spouses & Partners Of LGBT Employees

From a memo sent yesterday to Walmart management, forwarded to me by a reader:

This week our associates will receive a pre-enrollment postcard at their homes announcing the dates for annual enrollment and providing highlights of the 2014 benefit offerings. Among the information highlighted on the postcard: We will cover domestic partners in the medical, dental, vision, life, critical illness and accident plans. This means Walmart will offer these benefits to an associate’s same- or opposite-sex spouse or unmarried partner. For details on who qualifies and some important tax considerations, you’ll find more information on WalmartOne.com/postcard.

The memo is from Sally Welborn, Walmart's Senior Vice President of Benefits. In addition to the above announcement, Welborn's memo notes several other unrelated changes to the company's benefits plan and then adds this:

It’s a business decision, not a moral or political decision. We operate in 50 states, hundreds of municipalities and Puerto Rico, and as clarified under the Supreme Court’s decision to strike down section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), each of these states are developing different definitions of marriage, domestic partner, civil union, etc. By developing a single definition for all Walmart associates in the U.S. and Puerto Rico, we are able to ensure consistency for associates across our markets.

The Affordable Care Act (commonly referred to as “ObamaCare") inextricably linked health insurance with employment. As such, for our associates for whom we offer health insurance, we want to be sure we are providing access to as many individuals and their families as possible.

Given the diverse world we live in today, a comprehensive benefit package that includes domestic partner benefits appeals to the contemporary workforce. Many companies, including most of our competitors, already offer spouse/partner benefits to their employees. Of 30 retail competitors, all but two (Publix and Stop and Shop union plan) provide either same- or opposite-sex domestic partner coverage.

Your behavior matters. The words you use also matter. We are counting on you to be thoughtful, supportive and understanding of multiple viewpoints. Your visibility can make a big difference to how associates feel.

I'm no fan of Walmart in general, but they ARE the nation's largest private employer and this is nothing short of fantastic news. (Tipped by JMG reader Michael)

MICHIGAN: Federal Court Strikes Down Ban On Domestic Partners Benefits

Via press release from the ACLU:

A federal judge today ruled that a state law that would have barred many public entities from providing health insurance to the domestic partners of their employees is unconstitutional. The American Civil Liberties Union and Kirkland & Ellis LLP challenged the law on behalf of five gay and lesbian public employees, as well as their long-term domestic partners, who either lost their health insurance or would have lost their insurance as a result of the law.

"We're breathing a sigh of relief right now," said Peter Ways, an Ann Arbor teacher whose partner would have lost his benefits. "This law was clearly meant to target families like ours and to make us feel as though we didn't count." In striking down the law, U.S. District Court Judge David M. Lawson found it discriminated by forcing cities, counties, school districts, and community colleges to cancel family benefits for gay and lesbian employees in committed relationships while heterosexual employees had the ability to marry their partners to maintain health insurance. Same-sex couples cannot marry in Michigan.

And the hits keep coming! Read the full press release.

SCOTUS Denies AZ Gov. Brewer's Attempt To Strip Domestic Partner Benefits

The Supreme Court today refused to review the appeal of Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer, who wants to strip state employees of domestic partner benefits. The Human Rights Campaign reacts via press release:

After the landmark decisions on the Defense of Marriage Act and Proposition 8 yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court issued orders today declining to review the remaining LGBT equality cases on its docket this term. Most significantly, the Court dismissed Arizona Governor Jan Brewer’s petition to overturn the decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in Brewer v. Diaz, in which that court concluded that Arizona violated the constitutional rights of LGBT Arizona state employees when it passed a law stripping them of their domestic partner benefits in 2009. Lambda Legal filed suit on behalf of ten state employees and their families.

“Yesterday’s victories at the Supreme Court thrilled LGBT people across the country, but it also reminded those living in many states of the inequality they and their families continue to face,” said HRC President Chad Griffin. “Today’s order brings Arizonans a step closer to enjoying the equality that all Americans deserve and that we are all committed to ensuring for everyone, everywhere. We congratulate Lambda Legal and their courageous plaintiffs in their successful fight against the callous discrimination of their elected officials.”

RELATED: The Court today also refused to take Lambda Legal's bid to overturn Nevada's constitutional ban on same-sex marriage. Lambda Legal had directly appealed to the Supreme Court in an attempt to bypass the Ninth Circuit, where the case will now be tried.

SAN ANTONIO: Christian Groups Threaten To Sue Over Domestic Partners

Two San Antonio-based Christian groups are threatening to sue the city in order to overturn insurance benefits granted to the partners of LGBT city employees.

Pastor Gerald Ripley [left] of Voices for Marriage and Philip Sevilla of Texas Leadership Coalition made the request Wednesday with backing from a few sign-carrying supporters at City Hall. Attorney General Greg Abbott issued an opinion April 29 stating cities that offer marriage benefits to employees' same-sex partners are violating the Texas Constitution. San Antonio has done so since 2011, at an annual cost then estimated at $300,000. Ripley and Sevilla also voiced opposition to Councilman Diego Bernal's proposal to update the city's anti-discrimination policies by adding protections for sexual orientation and gender identity. Further, Ripley and Sevilla oppose funding a city liaison to the gay community. The city's Governance Committee takes up Bernal's proposals on Tuesday.

Pastor Ripley: "We cannot allow this in San Antonio. We are not San Francisco." Ripley's partner in hate, the Texas Leadership Coalition, is a group comprised of "Catholic laymen." San Antonio's city attorney says they will not take action until the Supreme Court rules next month.

FRC Cheers Texas Attorney General

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott said yesterday that municipalities are breaking the state constitution if they offer domestic partners benefits. And because they don't want gay people to have health insurance, that makes the Family Research Council very happy. Via press release:

In three cities and a school district, liberal Texans have tried to undermine the 2005 marriage referendum by offering benefits for same-sex partners. Unlike many amendments, Texas's specifically outlaws any "political subdivision" from creating a "legal status identical or similar to marriage"--and Monday, the Attorney General made it clear that those political subdivisions include local governments.

State Senator Dan Patrick had brought the matter to Abbott's attention in December, and FRC drafted a letter in support of Patrick's inquiry, urging the Attorney General to uphold the will of the people--75% of whom voted to protect marriage as the union of a man and woman. At a time when the fight over marriage is escalating--and the Left is looking for any legal foothold it can find--General Abbott's opinion is great news for voters across Texas! Our thanks and congratulations to state Senator Patrick for being bold enough to raise the issue--before it was too late.

As I noted yesterday, the city council of Austin and the commissioners of Travis County are discussing Abbott's opinion with their lawyers.

Texas Attorney General: Domestic Partner Benefits Violate State Constitution

GOP Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott says that any city that offers domestic partner benefits is in violation of the state constitution.

Domestic partnerships, as recognized by the local governments, are close enough to the definition of marriage to violate a constitutional amendment banning same-sex unions that 76 percent of Texas voters approved in 2005, the opinion stated. “By creating domestic partnerships and offering health benefits based on them, the political subdivisions have created and recognized something not established by Texas law,” the opinion said. Lawyers for Austin and Travis County have begun researching the opinion to help political leaders determine if it should be followed. Attorney general opinions attempt to determine how Texas courts would rule on a legal matter, but only the courts have the definitive say on constitutional questions.

Travis County, which has offered such benefits for 16 years, will hold a meeting next week to discuss Abbott's claim.  The Austin City Council will meet with its lawyers but says it has no plan to change its benefits. (Tipped by JMG reader Jeff)

Perkins Cheers Wyoming Defeat

"Unlike other bills, this one would have extended special benefits to just about any two people--including platonic relationships--stripping marriage of all meaning or incentive. Once again, Rep. [Mark] Baker pointed out the ridiculously high costs to taxpayers, especially as it pertains to homosexuals. Though we've not researched his source, Baker insisted that only 1% of homosexuals die of old age, a reference to the expensive health conditions associated with same-sex behavior. He insisted that would only burden the state's budget more. The majority of lawmakers agreed, stopping the bill by a 34-25 vote on the statehouse floor. Both victories were a shot in the arm for the marriage movement, which could use a few more fearless leaders like Wyoming's!" - Hate group leader Tony Perkins, cheering Wyoming's rejection of a domestic partnership bill.

WY House Rejects Domestic Partners

The Wyoming House has rejected the domestic partners bill that passed out of its committee on Monday.  

The House voted 35-to-24 against the bill. It marked the first time that pro-gay legislation reached a full floor debate in the state Legislature.  Proponents of the bill said that it would grant same-sex couples as well as other citizens a way to share their property and make health care decisions for each other. Opponents warned that the bill threatened to open the state to legal action seeking to force it to approve same-sex marriage. A separate bill cleared the Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday that would outlaw discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. That bill now heads to the full Senate.

Some activists had been hopeful regarding today's vote since the Republican-heavy committee vote had been 7-2.  That same committee had rejected a marriage equality bill by a 5-4 vote minutes earlier.

WYOMING: House Committee Rejects Marriage, Approves Partnership Bill

The vote for a domestic partnerships bill was 7-2 shortly after the same committee narrowly rejected same-sex marriage by a 5-4 vote.

UPDATE: Wyoming Equality reacts via press release.

Today, a historic law that would protect lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) families passed its first hurdle in the Wyoming House of Representatives by a 7-2 vote. House Bill (HB) 168 would create a domestic partnership registry for opposite-sex and same-sex couples in committed relationships. HB169, which would have granted same-sex couples the freedom to marry, failed by a 5-4 vote.

The law, which was authored by Representative Cathy Connolly, would provide essential protections to LGBT families. The Domestic Partnerships Rights and Responsibilities Act (HB168) would ensure that both opposite-sex and same-sex couples have basic legal protections, such as the ability to make emergency medical decisions for each other and to make joint decisions about their children’s health and wellbeing.

"This is a historic day for equality," said Jeran Artery, the Chair of Wyoming Equality. "Today marks the first time a bill has moved forward in the Wyoming legislature which would provide essential protections for LGBT families."

HRC Issues 2013 Corporate Equality Index

Via press release:

In the 2013 CEI, released today, a record 252 businesses achieved the top rating of 100 percent, earning the coveted distinction of "Best Places to Work for LGBT Equality." As a point of comparison, 13 businesses earned a 100 percent in the inaugural CEI 11 years ago, demonstrating that a new normal has arrived. The policies, benefits and practices businesses must implement to earn a perfect score are best-in-class demonstrations of corporate commitments to LGBT workers.

While basic protections for LGBT employees have become the norm, record numbers of American businesses have also updated their larger benefits packages, adding "soft benefits" for LGBT workers, including things like retirement benefits to domestic partners and relocation assistance. With benefits accounting for roughly 20 percent of an employee's compensation, companies recognize this as a matter of equal pay for equal work.

Over the past 11 years, the CEI has become the gold standard for corporate policies and practices related to LGBT employees and their families. The CEI rates companies on 40 such policies and practices. A total of 889 businesses have been rated in the 2013 CEI, including the entire Fortune 500. This year a record 293 of the Fortune 500-ranked businesses have an official CEI rating, with the other 201 rated based upon publicly-available data.

View the full report.