 |
|
|
says Lambda Legal |
|
Compiled By GayToday
"Vancouver recognizes that providing equal insurance benefits to unmarried city employees is simply the fair thing to do," said Pizer who helped author the joint amicus brief filed by Lambda, the ACLU of Washington, and the National ACLU Lesbian and Gay Rights Project. She added: "Vancouver and its residents benefit when all city employees can rest assured that their families have basic insurance coverage, because peace of mind improves morale and effectiveness in the workplace." Lambda and the ACLU argue that home rule cities like Vancouver, under Washington law, have substantial power to govern themselves; their brief also outlines why Vancouver, as an employer, is well-served by its partner benefits plan. The brief points out that there is no conflict between this local law and state law, in that Washington law protects people in unmarried relationships in various ways.
In June 2000, the trial court rejected Heinsma's arguments and ruled definitively in the city's favor, pointing out that Vancouver has not tried to regulate family relationships in general as the marriage laws do, but instead is simply ensuring reasonable compensation for its own employees. Heinsma then appealed. Shortly after receiving the Lambda/ACLU amicus brief, the Court of Appeals, on its own motion, asked the Washington Supreme Court to accept review of the case. Cooperating Attorney Karolyn Ann Hicks of Seattle's Stokes Lawrence, P.S. drafted the amicus brief, with assistance from Pizer and Aaron Caplan of the ACLU of Washington. Lambda has helped cities and counties around the country defend domestic partner benefits for unmarried employees, defeating attacks in areas such as Atlanta, Chicago, New York, Santa Barbara, Pima County, Arizona, and Broward County, Florida. Heinsma v. City of Vancouver, No. 26223-1-II |
Washington State Supreme Court Justice Gerry Alexander 