Welcome

Saying the system does not violate the state's ban on same-sex marriage, a judge has upheld Wisconsin's domestic partners registry.

Dane County Circuit Judge Daniel Moeser ruled that the 2009 law does not create a legal status for partners that is identical or substantially similar to that of marriage and therefore it does not violate the constitutional ban approved by voters in 2006. “The state does not recognize domestic partnership in a way that even remotely resembles how the state recognizes marriage,” Moeser said in the ruling. “Moreover, domestic partners’ have far fewer legal rights, duties, and liabilities in comparison to the legal rights, duties, and liabilities of spouses.”

The anti-gay Christian group that brought the suit says they will now appeal to the state Supreme Court.

You know what to do.

Last year a too-broadly worded anti-gay ballot referendum not only rescinded domestic partner benefits for El Paso city employees, it ended insurance benefits for some retired cops and firefighters. Yesterday the city council reversed the ballot measure.

After hearing spirited arguments from members of the public on both sides of the issue, the council split 4-4. Mayor John Cook, who proposed the ordinance restoring benefits, broke the tie in favor of it despite a ballot initiative in November ending them. City Reps. Beto O'Rourke and Rachel Quintana, who will leave the council in two weeks, voted in favor of restoring the benefits. Quintana's replacement, Michiel Noe, on Tuesday said he would not have voted the way she did. "Although I think everyone should have benefits, I would have respected the will of the voters," Noe said. "Now, if the courts had decided that was illegal, then I would have voted according to what the ruling said. But they said that the vote was legal, so again I would respect the will of the voters."

Pastor Tom Brown, the author of the original measure, says he will launch a recall drive against the city council members who voted to restore the benefits.

In November 2010, El Paso's Pastor Tom Brown organized a ballot referendum banning the city from offering domestic partners benefits. Only after the measure passed did the city realize that it was so broadly written, it would also ban benefits for retired cops and firefighters. Nevertheless, yesterday a federal judge upheld the ban.

The ordinance forcing the city of El Paso to "uphold traditional family values" will stand, and elected officials, retirees, affiliated service contractors, domestic partners of employees and certain dependent children will be left out, ruled a federal judge. "This is an example of how direct democracy can have unexpected consequences," wrote Federal Judge Frank Montalvo quoting James Madison. The plaintiffs who filed the lawsuit included city employees, domestic partners of city employees, retirees and even elected officials.

They wanted the ordinance struck on two grounds. They alleged it prevented them from obtaining health insurance, thus violating the contract they had with the insurance company, and that they were denied equal protection under the law, meaning, they were singled out for discrimination. "We keep hearing from the critics that the ordinance that the people passed was unconstitutional, well, we now have a federal judge that says this is completely constitutional," Tom Brown said. He is the leader of El Pasoans for Traditional Family Values and was the man behind the movement to deny benefits. "What more does city council need?"

(Tipped by JMG reader Melissa)