06/05/2007
Kalamazoo, Michigan Reverses Domestic Partner Rights
Following a Michigan Court of Appeals ruling on May 23 that the state's marriage amendment prohibits public employers from offering domestic partner benefits, the city of Kalamazoo has told four non-unionized employees that their partners have about a month to find alternative health insurance.
Said Kalamazoo City Manager Kenneth Collard: "We have no authority, as being a creation of the state, to ignore the (Michigan) constitution as defined."
Some cities in Michigan, but apparently not Kalamazoo, have upheld the benefits pending an appeal brought by 21 same-sex couples and the ACLU which the Michigan High Court has said they will hear.
Said ACLU of Michigan executive director Kary Moss: "It was never the intention of Michigan voters, who approved the marriage amendment, to take health care benefits away from Michigan families. We are excited about this development and hope that the Michigan Supreme Court will give these families another chance at justice by asking a lower court to explore voter intent."
UPDATE: Ann Arbor School District says they too shall "honor the will of the voters."
Sphere: Related ContentPosted 10:12 AM EST by Andy in Gay Rights, Michigan, News | Permalink
Like it?
Subscribe to FREE Towleroad daily headlines with our RSS feed!
RECENT STORIES:
Comments
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
Kary Moss is wrong. It was exactly the intent of those voters to remove every possible right from same-sex couples...that's why they passed it in the first place. The marriage issue is simply the easiest way to hit where it counts. By one stroke of the pen all rights are removed, without really saying that. It's discrimination at it's worst...decided by the majority, against the minority, and worded so poorly (or precisely depending on which side you stand on) that the marriage issue is the least of the consequences. This is Bush and Rove at their best/worst.
Posted by: Wayne | Jun 5, 2007 10:46:33 AM
I live in Ann Arbor at an a staff member at the University of Michigan. I am very concerned and upset over this and my partner losing his benefits.
Posted by: Carl | Jun 5, 2007 12:42:04 PM
Carl, I'd be a bit more than very concerned. I'm really surprised there isn't a load of outrage and high drama going on in this post. This is absolutely sickening, and while Kary Moss sounds like the typical political spin doctor, some very REAL PEOPLE have just been completely marginalized. Sick.
Isn't it time our Federal laws changed?
When I'M president...
Posted by: FizziekruntNT | Jun 5, 2007 12:49:40 PM
@wayne
How is this Bush and Roves fault? It seems to me that this is clearly a state issue. Honestly - if Bush and Rove pushed for a federal amendment - they would of had it. I still contend they don't care much about the issue and just playing to their base.
What this does is - clearly and without any doubt - state that those six magic words "or similar union for any purpose" do away with all possible legal arrangements between two adults. This goes against those who were in support of this stupid amendment who stated that wouldn't happen. This can be used to battle these amendments in other states.
Also this also proves that the strategy of using the courts continues to be a lousy one.
Posted by: yoshi | Jun 5, 2007 1:03:52 PM
Federal law would have a hard time mandating benefits for state employees, though they do greenmail with highway money rules all the time.
The big K may wish to tackle the issue of their silly town name before all else.
Posted by: anon (gmail.com) | Jun 5, 2007 2:22:29 PM
I happen to live in Kalamazoo, and I can't believe they're doing this. Kalamazoo for the longest time was steadfast in its promise to keep domestic partner benefits alive. I'm so ashamed right now of the city for just rolling over without a fight.
These are sad times, indeed. Both in Michigan and in the US in general. Hopefully the Democrats can do something more than just talk, and help the people that have been marginalized.
Posted by: Travis | Jun 5, 2007 4:31:44 PM
Yoshi...do you work for the Bush administration or are you simply an idiot? Of course Bush and Rove are partially responsible for this debacle in Michigan and in every other affected state. Rove created and engineered the strategy of putting marriage amendments on the ballots of key states during state elections in order to get out the Republican vote. He knew it was a polarizing issue that would draw the most conservative voters to the polls. And Bush approved this strategy. So, yes, Bush and Rove ARE responsible for anti-gay marriage amendments across the country and the negative consequences for GLBT families.
Your opinion that BushCo, could have had a federal marriage amendment if he had truly wanted it is either naive or manipulatively false. Bush did not have enough support in Congress to get the Federal Marriage Amendment approved.
Your assertion that using the courts is a lousy strategy for redress further proves your ignorance/naivete/partisanship. Using the courts is the ONLY strategy that hated and misunderstood communitites (like the GLBT community) can use for protection. Seeking legal equality via ballot will never work in our favor. The majority will never vote to extend equal rigthts to a misunderstood minority, and we are a misunderstood minority. Waiting for legislative bodies to grant us the rights we deserve isn't likely to work either. Elected officials are whores for votes, playing to their constituencies (the aforementioned majority). We'll never get enough elected officials to stick their necks out for us to create any change. And that leaves the courts...our sole means of securing the rights that everyone else in this hateful country enjoys without question.
Posted by: peterparker | Jun 5, 2007 5:12:24 PM