Pennsylvania supreme court considers same-sex partner benefits
October 23 2003 11:00 PM ET
The Pennsylvania supreme court has agreed to decide whether Philadelphia may grant benefits to same-sex partners of city employees. The justices said they will hear the city's appeal of a lower court ruling that forbade the city from recognizing same-sex "life partnerships." A 1998 package of laws amended the definition of the term "marital status" to include "life partner," thereby allowing the granting of benefits to same-sex partners of city employees who signed a partnership affidavit. Former mayor Ed Rendell, now Pennsylvania's governor, signed the domestic-partner bills in May 1998 after they were narrowly approved by the city council. A group of seven city taxpayers later sued, charging that the city did not have the power to create a new marital status. A Philadelphia common pleas judge sided with the city, but a commonwealth court overturned the laws in August 2002, saying they usurped the power of the state to regulate marriage. "We hold that the city was without authority to legislate in the field of domestic relations by defining and creating a new marital status," senior judge Joseph Doyle wrote in a decision that also struck down a city ordinance that allowed domestic partners to transfer title or obtain joint title to real estate without paying the city's transfer tax. In its appeal to the state supreme court, the city accused the commonwealth court of "ignoring differences in purpose and effect between state marriage laws and the ordinances."
About 350 couples have registered as domestic partners since the laws took effect, according to the Philadelphia Commission on Human Relations, a city agency. In accepting the case October 8, the supreme court said it would allow a friend-of-the-court brief to be filed on behalf of numerous civil rights groups that support the laws, including the Center for Lesbian and Gay Civil Rights and the American Civil Liberties Union. Stacey Sobel, executive director of the Center for Lesbian and Gay Civil Rights, lauded the high court's decision to hear the case. "What the city's ordinances do is provide very limited benefits to people who live and work in the city, and that...should be within the city's legal
authority to determine," Sobel said. But Dennis M. Abrams, who represents the taxpayers, said the city does not have the "authority to legislate in the area of marriage."
- Holiday Guide: Shop Here, Not There
- New Celeb Couple: Dustin Lance Black and Tom Daley
- WATCH: Jared Leto on Avoiding Trans Character 'Cliché' for 'Dallas Buyers Club'
- Op-ed: Straight Teen Girls Can Change the World
- Op-ed: How a Symbol Changed Hearts and Minds
- Russia's High Court Declares 'Gay Propaganda' Ban Constitutional
- Entertainment News Bill Hader Wanted Stefon's Goodbye to Be Emotional 1 hour 12 min ago
- Women 13 Reasons to Let AHS: Coven Cast A Spell on You -- in GIFs 1 hour 25 min ago
- Sports You Can Play and NFL Team Up With LGBT Youth 2 hours 24 min ago
- Entertainment News Gay Men's Chorus of Los Angeles Performs Parody of Joe Boxer Christmas Ad 2 hours 26 min ago
- Women WATCH: Sara Gilbert on the Pressure for People Like Maria Bello to Come Out 2 hours 44 min ago
- Women Ms. Fit: A Lesbian-Friendly, Feminist Fitness Mag for All Women 2:47 PM
- Women Who Was Broadway Producer and Lesbian Cheryl Crawford? 2:41 PM