Post-Death To DOMA, A Michigan Judge Blocks A Ban On Domestic Partner Benefits

Oopsy. It looks like some Michigan lawmakers just got bitchslapped by a federal judge.

See, last Friday, U.S. District Judge David Lawson blocked Michigan's ban on domestic partner benefits for public school and local government employees because he believes that state lawmakers simply wanted to punish gays and lesbians.

Oh. But.He.Did.

Lawson said plaintiffs who have lost benefits or were forced to buy expensive private health insurance have made a "plausible claim" that the law violates the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution:

"It is hard to argue with a straight face that the primary purpose — indeed, perhaps the sole purpose — of the statute is other than to deny health benefits to the same-sex partners of public employees. But that can never be a legitimate governmental purpose."

The ban on domestic partner benefits was passed in 2011 by the Republican-controlled Legislature and signed by Republican-controlled governor’s off, AKA Rick Snyder, and effectively ended insurance coverage  for people whose domestic partners work for certain public employers.

Supporters of the law, i.e. homophobes and bigots, say it saves tax dollars and follows the spirit of Michigan’s 2004 constitutional amendment—approved, at the time, by 58% voters—that defines marriage only as a union between a man and a woman.

In his 51-page opinion, Lawson cited last week's decision by the U.S. Supreme Court that struck down the portion of DOMA that barred certain benefits to married same-sex couples.

Although the injunction doesn't end the case, Michigan ACLU legal director Michael Steinberg believes that the law is doomed, and adding that any public school district or local government can now choose to restore or create benefits for same-sex couples or unmarried heterosexual couples.

Governor Snyder's office said the governor will review the ruling and consult with the state attorney general "to determine any next steps," meaning he’ll stomp his feet and cry activist judges. And, the state itself could appeal; the attorney general's office, which defended the law in court, had no comment but Ari Adler, spokesman for House Speaker and Republican Jase Bolger said the law's supporters still stand behind it.

On a happy—can’t-wait-to-see-it-happen—sidenote, another judge is considering whether to strike down Michigan's nearly 9-year-old ban on same-sex marriage.

The march goes on.

UPDATE

That other Michigan judge--citing last week's SCOTUS ruling on DOMA--will allow a lesbian couple to sue the state for marriage rights:

"Plaintiffs’ equal protection claim has sufficient merit to proceed. The United States Supreme Court’s recent decision in United States v. Windsor, No. 12-307 (U.S. Jun. 26, 2013), has provided the requisite precedential fodder for both parties to this litigation.

Plaintiffs are prepared to claim Windsor as their own. And why shouldn’t they? The Supreme Court has just invalidated a federal statute on equal protection grounds because it “place[d] same-sex couples in an unstable position of being in a second-tier marriage.”

Moreover, and of particular importance to this case, the justices expressed concern that the natural consequence of such discriminatory legislation would not only lead to the relegation of same-sex relationships to a form of second-tier status, but impair the rights of “tens of thousands of children now being raised by same-sex couples” as well. Id. This is exactly the type of harm plaintiffs seek to remedy in this case."

The trial date will be set later this month.

source