Same-sex marriage in Michigan

From Infogalactic: the planetary knowledge core
Jump to: navigation, search
Legal status of same-sex unions
Marriage
Performed
Recognized
  1. When performed in Mexican states that have legalized same-sex marriage
  2. When performed in the Netherlands proper
  3. Marriages performed in some municipalities and recognized by the state

* Not yet in effect
LGBT portal

Same-sex marriage is legal in Michigan and all other U.S. states as per the U.S. Supreme Court ruling of Obergefell v. Hodges on June 26, 2015.

Michigan had banned recognition of same-sex unions in any form since a 2004 popular vote added an amendment to the state constitution. Previously, a statute enacted in 1996 banned both the licensing of same-sex marriages and the recognition of same-sex marriages from other jurisdictions.

On March 21, 2014, a U.S. District Court ruled the state's denial of marriage rights to same-sex couples unconstitutional. More than 300 same-sex couples married in Michigan the next day before the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals stayed enforcement of the district court decision. On November 6, 2014, the Sixth Circuit reversed the lower court's ruling and upheld Michigan's ban on same-sex marriage. The state has been ordered to recognize the 323 marriages performed on March 22, and the state has announced it will not appeal that order.

Same-sex marriage

Statute

In June 1995, the Michigan House of Representatives voted 88-14 to ban same-sex marriage in the state, while the Michigan State Senate voted 31-2 in favor of the ban. Also in June, the Michigan House also approved, in a 74-28 vote, a bill banning recognition of out of state-same-sex marriages. The Michigan Senate also approved this bill.[1][2] Governor John Engler signed both bills into law.

Constitutional amendment

<templatestyles src="Module:Hatnote/styles.css"></templatestyles>

Main article: Michigan Proposal 04-2

In 2004, voters approved a constitutional amendment, Michigan Proposal 04-2, that banned same-sex marriage and civil unions in the state. It passed with 58.6% of the vote. The Michigan Supreme Court later ruled that public employers in Michigan could not grant domestic partnership benefits given the restrictions imposed by the amendment.[3]

DeBoer v. Snyder

<templatestyles src="Module:Hatnote/styles.css"></templatestyles>

Main article: DeBoer v. Snyder

On January 23, 2012, a lesbian couple filed a lawsuit, DeBoer v. Snyder, in federal district court, challenging the state's ban on adoption by same-sex couples seeking to jointly adopt their children. In August 2012, Judge Bernard A. Friedman invited the couple to amend their suit to challenge the state's ban on same-sex marriage, "the underlying issue".[4] On March 7, 2013, Friedman announced that he would delay ruling pending the outcome of two same-sex marriage cases before the U.S. Supreme Court, United States v. Windsor and Hollingsworth v. Perry.[5] Friedman held a trial from February 25 to March 7, 2014. On March 21, he ruled for the plaintiffs, ending Michigan's denial of marriage rights to same-sex couples.[6] Michigan Attorney General Bill Schuette immediately filed an emergency motion requesting a stay of the ruling.[7]

Four of Michigan's 83 county clerks opened their offices on Saturday, March 22, to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples: Barb Byrum of Ingham County, Nancy Waters of Muskegon County, Lisa Brown of Oakland County, and Lawrence Kestenbaum of Washtenaw County.[8][9] The four counties issued 323 marriage licenses that day.[10] The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, temporarily stayed enforcement of Friedman's ruling that same day,[11] and stayed the ruling indefinitely on March 25.[12] On March 28, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder announced that the federal government recognizes the validity of same-sex marriages licensed on March 22.[13]

On November 6, 2014, the Sixth Circuit reversed the lower court's ruling and upheld Michigan's ban on same-sex marriage.[14]

Later, the case has been appellate to the Supreme Court of the United States. The ruling was handed down June 27, 2015.[15]

Caspar v. Snyder

Eight same-sex couples represented by the ACLU filed suit in U.S. district court on July 25, 2014, seeking recognition of their so-called "window marriages" established on March 21 and 22, 2014, before the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals stayed a district court ruling–later reversed–in DeBoer v. Snyder that found Michigan's ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional.[16] The state has asked the district court to suspend proceedings pending final resolution of DeBoer or to find those marriages invalid.[17] On January 15, 2015, U.S. District Judge Mark A. Goldsmith ruled that the state must recognize those marriages, but stayed implementation of his ruling for 21 days. He wrote: "In these circumstances, what the state has joined together, it may not put asunder."[18][19] On February 4, Governor Rick Snyder announced that the state will recognize those marriages and not appeal the decision.[20]

Carrick v. Snyder

In January 2015, pastor Neil Patrick Carrick of Detroit Michigan brought a case, Carrick v. Snyder, against Michigan, stating that the state's ban of same sex marriage and polygamy violates the Free Exercise and Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution.[21][22]

Domestic partnerships

Ban

In May 2008, the Michigan Supreme Court held that the amendment added to the state constitution in 2004 bans not only same-sex marriage and civil unions, but also public employee domestic partnership benefits such as health insurance.[23] The ruling however had little effect since most public employers relaxed their eligibility criteria to avoid violating the amendment's restrictions.[24]

On September 15, 2011, the Michigan House of Representatives, in a 64-44 vote, approved a bill that would ban most public employers, though not colleges and universities, from offering health benefits to the domestic partners of their employees. It did not apply to workers whose benefits are established by the Michigan Civil Service Commission. On December 7, 2011, the Michigan State Senate, in a 27-9 vote, approved of the bill. On December 22, 2011, Governor Rick Snyder signed the legislation.[25] Five same-sex couples challenged the law in Bassett v. Snyder. On June 28, 2013, U.S. District Judge David M. Lawson issued a preliminary injunction blocking the state from enforcing its law banning local governments and school districts from offering health benefits to their employees' domestic partners. He wrote: "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". He rejected the state's arguments that "fiscal responsibility" was the law's rationale.[26][27] On February 14, 2014, the state asked him to lift that preliminary injunction, repeating its arguments about the "fiscal insecurity of local governments" and eliminating "irrational and unfair" local programs.[28]

Local domestic partnerships

Map of Michigan counties and cities that offer domestic partner benefits either county-wide or in particular cities.
  City offers domestic partner benefits
  County-wide partner benefits through domestic partnership
  County or city does not offer domestic partner benefits

While there are no statewide recognition, these local governments recognize domestic partnerships:

Cities
Counties

Public opinion

Public opinion for same-sex marriage in Michigan
Poll source Date(s)
administered		 Sample
size		 Margin of
error		  % support  % opposition  % no opinion  % refused
New York Times/CBS News/YouGov September 20-October 1, 2014 2,560 likely voters ± 2.4% 47% 39% 14% -
EPIC-MRA September 25–29, 2014 600 adults ± 4% 47% 47% 6% -
EPIC-MRA May 17–20, 2014 600 likely voters ± 4% 47% 46% 7% -
Marketing Resource Group of Lansing March 2014  ? ± ?% 45% 50% - -
State of the State Survey December 16, 2013 – February 10, 2014 1,008 adults ± 3.1% 54% 36% - -
Glengariff Group Inc. January 29-February 1, 2014 600 likely presidential election year voters ± 4% 56.2% 33.8% - -
Glengariff Group Inc. May 8–10, 2013 600 voters ± 4% 56.8% 37.6% - -
EPIC-MRA May 2013 600 likely voters ± 4% 51% 41% - -
State of the State Survey June 12-August 13, 2012 1,015 adults ± ?% 56% 39% - -
Public Policy Polling May 24–27, 2012 500 voters ± 4.4% 41% 45% 14% -
Glengariff Group Inc. May 10–11, 2012 600 likely 2012 November general election voters ± 4% 44.3% 43.7% 11% 1%
Public Policy Polling July 21–24, 2011 593 voters ± 4% 33% 53% 14% -
Glengariff Group Inc. January 2011  ? ± ?% 38.5% 50.2% - -
State of the State Survey 2010  ? ± ?% 48% 51% - -
Glengariff Group Inc. October 2004  ? ± ?% 24% 61% - -

See also

References

  1. ↑ House OK's ban on gay marriages
  2. ↑ State Senate OK's gay marriage, sends bill to Engler
  3. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  4. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  5. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  6. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  7. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  8. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  9. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  10. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  11. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  12. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  13. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  14. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  15. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  16. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  17. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  18. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  19. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  20. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  21. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  22. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  23. ↑ National Pride at Work, Inc. v. Governor of Michigan 748 N.W.2d 524
  24. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  25. ↑ House Bill 4770 (2011)
  26. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  27. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  28. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  29. ↑ 29.0 29.1 29.2 29.3 Governments Offering Benefits
  30. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  31. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  32. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
Retrieved from "https://infogalactic.com/w/index.php?title=Same-sex_marriage_in_Michigan&oldid=717779860"