Fresh Litigation Route For Freedom to Marry in New York
February 21, 2010
Gay City News
February 18, 2010
Remember that great song where Sinatra croons, “Love and marriage go
together like a horse and carriage, it’s an institute you can’t
disparage”?
Well, for the gay and lesbian citizens of the State of New
York, the “institute” has been quite disparaged. And while Frank failed to
mention it, marriage is not just about love, it’s also about economics and the
law. The discriminatory denial of the fundamental right of marriage to same-sex
couples works real and substantial hardships on many New Yorkers.
For
example, studies show that a same-sex unmarried couple can end up paying
$450,000 more over their lifetimes than an opposite-sex married couple due to
differential taxation, estate planning treatment, and, of course, insurance
costs. In fact, when New York’s highest court, the Court of Appeals, upheld
marriage discrimination in 2006, the court acknowledged that New York affords
married couples at least 316 benefits, including the “right to be treated as
family members in obtaining insurance coverage.” Advocates have identified more
than 1,000 rights and benefits of marriage under state law.
Even as it
refused to recognize a right to marriage for gay and lesbian couples under New
York’s Constitution, the Court of Appeals invited the State Legislature to
address the issue. The New York State Assembly thereafter passed a same-sex
marriage bill no less than three times. The State Senate, however, failed even
to vote on the matter for three years; and when it held a belated vote in
December, it refused to pass the bill.
To add insult to injury, 37 of the
38 senators who voted “no” declined, during the floor debate, even to give a
reason for denying same-sex couples this fundamental right.
The good news
is that some gay and lesbian New Yorkers now have the ability to enjoy at least
316 benefits that New York’s judiciary and Legislature have, so far, unjustly
refused them, and I am proud to say that I was able to play a role in addressing
this ongoing injustice.
Five
states, including bordering Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Vermont, as well as
several other nations, currently allow same-sex marriages. Since 2008, New York
has recognized such marriages entered into in other states and countries. During
my tenure as the New York Superintendent of Insurance, I ordered all insurance
companies doing business in New York to recognize the marriages of same-sex
couples who were legally wed elsewhere.
As a result of that regulatory
action, New York insurers must now provide the very same property, life, and
health insurance policies and benefits to same-sex married couples that are
available to opposite-sex married couples under the state’s insurance
laws.
It is, however, fundamentally unfair that only those same-sex
couples who are able to travel elsewhere to get married can have their unions
recognized in New York — and thereby obtain the economic and legal benefits that
marriage allows. It is the least wealthy, and therefore the most economically
vulnerable, same-sex couples who are also least likely to have the wherewithal
to leave New York to get married — and therefore are being left without any of
the crucial economic and legal benefits of marriage in our state.
The
differing treatment of couples who can leave the state to get married and those
without the means to travel only serves to underline the irrationality of the
current state of the law. Indeed, it may provide a new basis to challenge the
unjust 2006 ruling in the courts.
If I have the privilege to become New
York’s next attorney general, I will — as the state’s chief law enforcement
officer — ensure that every state agency and private company provides those
same-sex couples who are able to marry outside New York with the benefits and
rights they are entitled to under New York law. Furthermore, I will ensure that
New York continues to advocate for the marriage rights of gays and lesbians in
the courts.
Simply put, the Court of Appeals’ conclusion
that the unequal treatment of lesbian and gay New York couples is permitted
under the due process and equal protection guarantees of our State’s
Constitution is wrong, and should not stand. I look forward to the day when
“love and marriage” really do go together for gay and lesbian New Yorkers. [Link]