Domestic Partner Registry *IS* Constitutional
(Cleveland, Ohio) A judge ruled Friday that the nation's first voter-approved domestic partner registry is constitutional.
The decision by Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Judge Robert T. Glickman rejected the challenge filed by The Rev. Jimmie Hicks Jr., a Cleveland Heights councilman. Hicks sued in February to stop the Cleveland suburb from continuing to register gay and straight unmarried couples.
Hicks' lawsuit had claimed the city did not have the authority to create the registry, but Glickman disagreed.
"The city of Cleveland Heights Domestic Partnership Registry is not beyond the scope of the municipalities' grant of power" from the state, Glickman wrote.
The judge also noted that the registry conferred no specific benefit and wasn't costly for the city.
Hicks said Friday he will appeal.
Eighty-five couples have registered since the city began accepting applications Jan. 26.
The initiative creating the registry passed with 55 percent of the vote last November in the community of 50,000.
The registry's recognition is not binding on courts, governments or employers. But supporters said it would make it easier for couples to share employment benefits, inherit property or get hospital visiting rights.
In February the legislature passed what is described as the nation's toughest ban on gay marriage. The new law not only bans same-sex marriage, but also forbids the state from recognizing gay marriages, civil unions or domestic partner agreements legalized outside the state and makes it declares it illegal to provide state benefits to gay couples. (story)
An effort is underway to enshrine the law in the state constitution, but Friday, a judge ruled that the wording on the proposed ballot initiative was misleading, not fair and not truthful.
http://www.365gay.com/newscon04/05/0...hioPartner.htm
Looks like we could see another state making a huge fuss about gay marriage over the coming weeks / months.
Regards,
Lee
