A proposed amendment to the state constitution banning same-sex marriage could present a legal challenge to Wisconsin companies that currently offer domestic partner benefits to their employees.
Most Wisconsinites oppose the idea of same-sex marriage, said Lindsey Ourada, a UW-Madison sophomore and founder of the Campus Edition of Action Wisconsin at UW-Madison. However, that opposition fades considerably when the legality of civil unions and domestic partner benefits is considered, she said.
According to Chris Ott, executive director of Action Wisconsin, 75 Wisconsin companies already offer domestic partner benefits to their employees. He said the companies do this to remain competitive and attract the best work force possible.
To become law, the proposed amendment must receive consecutive two-thirds majorities in dual legislative sessions and also pass a state-wide referendum.
Ott said it is conceivable that the amendment could then be used to challenge preexisting benefits in the courts. Hypothetically, a stockholder who disagreed with domestic partner benefits could file suit against the company, citing the amendments prohibition of same-sex marriage and \anything substantially similar to marriage,"" Ott said.
""The makers of the bill need to realize that they're opening a legal can of worms for a lot of companies,"" Ott said.
Ott added that the amendment would be one of the harshest laws in the country. Most states already ban same-sex marriage and Congress is considering a federal amendment banning same-sex marriage. However, only three states go so far as to ban all forms of civil unions as the Wisconsin amendment would, Ott said.
Ourada said in the short term the amendment is unlikely to affect UW-Madison students because the companies that offer domestic partner benefits only do so for full-time positions.
UW-Madison is one of the few Big Ten schools that does not offer domestic partner benefits to faculty and staff. A recent move to change that would likely be stymied by passage of the amendment, Ott said.
Carousel Boyd, a lecturer at the UW-Madison Law School, said the proposed amendment would have much less reach than some fear. She said because it concerns marriage specifically, it would likely have no effect on domestic partner benefits.
