The Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled Thursday local governments cannot intervene in a case involving domestic partner benefits for state employees.
Six current or former state employees and their partners filed the suit against the Department of Employee Trust Fund. The employees said the state’s denial of health benefits to employees’ same-sex partners violated the Wisconsin Constitution, according to court documents.
The municipalities, consisting of two cities, towns, villages and two school districts, according to court documents, wanted a role in the case because they believed they would have to start paying increased health care costs.
Larry Dupuis, legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Wisconsin, said he believes the decision would allow the case to move promptly.
“Now the parties … to the case can litigate the case the way that they need to litigate it, without other people bringing a bunch of motions and doing things that could delay the case for years and years,” Dupuis said.
Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson said in the majority opinion the municipalities did not clearly show how the results of the case would affect them, and they “failed to demonstrate … how their interests relate to [the case] in a direct and immediate fashion.”
Michael Dean, the attorney representing the municipalities, said he believes the Supreme Court’s decision was wrong and the case would affect employees across the state.
“Municipalities’ health and benefit plans are governed by exactly the same statutory definitions that the state plans are,” Dean said. “So to change the state employers’ plans will be to change the municipal and school board plans.”
Dean said he plans to file a “friend of the court” brief, a way to make arguments in a case one is not directly involved in.
Justice David Prosser said in dissenting opinion the majority ruling did not acknowledge how widespread the results of the case could be.
“[The majority opinion’s] crimped legal analysis treats the municipalities’ request as though the case involved nothing more than a routine zoning variance instead of one of the great social and political controversies of our time,” he said.
Justice Louis Butler stated the danger of allowing outsiders to participate in cases. Butler said large interest groups would be able to take advantage of the judicial system if the local governments were allowed to add themselves to the case.
The underlying case between the employees and the state has not yet been ruled on.
