Multiple groups petitioned the state Supreme Court Tuesday regarding a lawsuit attempting to strike down Wisconsin's domestic-partner benefits law.
The American Civil Liberties Union and Lambda Legal, a Chicago-based civil rights organization, seek to defend the law, passed as part of Gov. Jim Doyle's 2009-'11 biennial budget.
""There are almost 15,000 same-sex couples and their families living in Wisconsin who need the basic protections provided by domestic partnerships,"" Christopher Clark, senior staff attorney for Lambda Legal, said in a statement. ""We plan to vigorously defend the important legal protections that the legislature validly enacted to protect Wisconsin citizens.""
Wisconsin Family Action, a conservative advocacy group, filed an original action suit with the Supreme Court in July. The group aims to overturn the domestic-partnership law they say violates the 2006 Wisconsin constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.
""The legal status that has been created by the registry is unconstitutional,"" Julaine Appling, president of WFA, said. ""Nearly 60 percent of the voters in November 2006 said marriage in this state is between a man and a woman and that a legal status identical to or substantially similar to that of marriage would not be valid or recognized in this state.""
Under current law, same-sex couples are eligible for 43 out of over 200 benefits reserved for legally married couples. The majority of benefits available to domestic partners include benefits related to health care issues, according to a statement from Lambda Legal.
Appling said same-sex couples can obtain the same benefits as legally married couples without relying on domestic-partnership laws by hiring a lawyer and going through the legal system.
""We don't have to redefine marriage and create a new legal status that approximates marriage in order for them to have those legal protections,"" Appling said.
According to Clark, same-sex couples would have to spend a significant amount of money to hire a lawyer to obtain the same protections reserved for married couples and those protections would still not be guaranteed.
Currently, the parties involved in the suit await a decision from the Supreme Court on whether it will hear the case.
WFA said the case should proceed directly to the Supreme Court, bypassing the lower courts, based on the constitutional importance of the case.
The defense disagreed, arguing for a normal proceeding beginning in the lower courts.
""There is nothing so urgent about this that it has to be decided at the Supreme Court level,"" attorney Lester Pines, who will represent the state in the case, said.
