Last week the Wisconsin Supreme Court decided not to hear the case of Appling v. Doyle, involving the constitutionality of domestic partner benefits.
Wisconsin Family Action CEO Julaine Appling filed a petition stating the domestic partner benefits instituted in Gov. Jim Doyle's 2009-11 biennium budget were in direct violation of the 2006 constitutional amendment banning gay marriage in Wisconsin.
Appling filed using original jurisdiction, which brings the case directly to the state Supreme Court instead of beginning in the lower courts.
The Supreme Court rarely exercises original jurisdiction, according to attorneys Richard Esenberg and Michael Dean, two lawyers who are working with Wisconsin Family Action. The organization chose to use original jurisdiction to ensure quick action.
The court was right to dismiss such an issue, and gave good reason to do so. The issue was not pressing enough to sidestep lower courts, according to the Supreme Court.
The issue of domestic partners may soon enough make its way back to the highest court in the state by way of the other side of the debate.
UW-Oshkosh professor Bill McConkey is claiming the gay marriage and civil union ban amendment, which passed in a referendum by 59 percent in November 2008, is invalid. The ballot contained two questions, one defining what marriage is and one defining what marriage is not, according to McConkey and, a referendum measure may only ask one question at a time.
Wisconsin Family Action argues that the question involved only one issue: marriage. It has also said McConkey cannot raise this issue in the courts as he is not gay, therefore not affected by it.
By just reading the question as it appeared on the ballot, it is clearly two issues, separated by not only a period, but also differing ideas.
""Only a marriage between one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in this state. A legal status identical or substantially similar to that of marriage for unmarried individuals shall not be valid or recognized in this state.""
We hope that the momentum garnered from the recent domestic partner benefits registry will carry over to the Supreme Court evaluating the gay marriage ban. It took far too long for Doyle to provide domestic partner benefits, and it is reassuring to see the courts support the decision rather than give Wisconsin Family Action preferential treatment as they promote their own exclusionary agenda.
