Arizona Appeals Domestic-Partners Case to 9th Circuit Court

Press Release

The State of Arizona has filed a petition asking that a larger panel of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals hear a case involving the state's elimination of health care benefits for domestic partners.

The move to eliminate those benefits, made in 2009 in response to a state budget crisis, was found
unconstitutional earlier this month by a smaller, three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit Court. Prior to a rule-change pushed through by the last administration, the State of Arizona had never before offered domestic-partner benefits. When budget realities forced Governor Brewer and the Legislature to eliminate those benefits, the state took action equally and across-the-board -- terminating benefits for the domestic partners of all state employees, regardless of sexual orientation.

"I ask that the 9th Circuit Court take another look at this case," said Governor Brewer. "The statute
signed into law in 2009 merely returned the State to the status quo regarding benefits. This represented just one of the many difficult decisions that had to be made in confronting an unprecedented budget crisis."
Upon taking the state's reins in January 2009, Governor Brewer inherited a multi-billion-dollar budget
shortfall. Tough decisions were the order of the day. Since the state had only recently extended health
coverage to the domestic partners of state employees, the Legislature and Governor Brewer pursued
eliminating this expansion as part of a host of cost-cutting moves.

But a group of state employees and their domestic partners filed suit in January 2010 to block the state,
and the U.S. District Court granted an injunction. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld that injunction in
recent weeks, explicitly noting in its decision that Arizona's Constitutional ban on gay marriage provides no
recourse for gay couples looking to obtain state health benefits.

"This issue isn't about whether the state should provide health benefits to domestic partners," said
Governor Brewer. "It's about whether the duly-elected officials of a state will maintain strict authority over its finances, or whether that control will be ceded to a court bent on installing a social agenda."

Source