| Same-sex provision holds up in court's first round
Catholic legislator seeks better results in appeal
By Dennis O'Connor
ARCHDIOCESE - Legal standing or not, Ohio Rep. Tom Brinkman insists he is going to continue the fight against a program at Miami University that specifically provides same-sex couples with medical insurance benefits.
Brinkman, a parishioner at Our Lord Christ the King Parish in Mt. Lookout, was handed a defeat in late November in a lawsuit he had filed in the Butler County Court of Common Pleas against Miami University. His contention was that the university's insurance program - designed explicitly for the benefit of homosexual couples in the employment of the Butler County-based university - was being conducted in violation of Ohio's Defense of Marriage Act and the Ohio Constitution.
Judge Charles L. Pater wrote in his decision that while Brinkman's argument may be correct, the Mt. Lookout legislator lacked the standing to sue Miami University.
"As a citizen, Brinkman fails to establish public rights standing because this type of standing is available only to those seeking extraordinary writs," Pater wrote. "Consequently, he does not have standing to sue, and judgment is rendered for Miami."
"The fact of the matter is that we passed a law in May of 2004 in the state of Ohio that said marriage is between a man and a woman," Brinkman said. "Miami University came up with a plan (to provide health insurance for same-sex couples) that they felt met the standards of the Defense of Marriage Act (approved by May 2004), but that changed with the elections in November that year."
That was when, during the general election, Ohio voters approved by a margin of nearly 65 percent, stronger language in the Ohio Constitution that further bolstered the Defense of Marriage Act. "The result was simply that in Ohio, you cannot have any policy that approximates marriage" between same-sex couples. Miami University's employee insurance program, which provided benefits to those it classifies as same-sex partners, now violated Ohio's Constitution, Brinkman said.
Miami University, contacted for comment, did not reply to The Catholic Telegraph in time for its deadline.
In 2004, voters approved measures defining marriage as the union of a man and a woman in all 11 states where the issue was on the ballot. The percentage of voters approving the constitutional amendments on marriage ranged from 56 percent in Oregon to 86 percent in Mississippi. In Michigan, where the Catholic Church had given an estimated $500,000 to the Citizens for the Protection of Marriage campaign, the amendment on same-sex marriage was approved by a 64 percent to 36 percent margin. Other states that approved amendments on same sex marriage included Arkansas, Georgia, Kentucky, Montana, North Dakota and Oklahoma.
Noting that "the Ohio Constitution should be accessible to the people," Brinkman brought suit to counter Miami's program, specifically citing the constitutional amendment's provision that also prohibited the state from creating marriage "substitutes" such as civil unions or domestic partnerships for same-sex couples. Miami University, a center of higher learning that is considered a "quasi-state institution," was therefore in direct violation of the newly passed amendment, he added.
"I don't have any problem with providing 'domestic partners' insurance," Brinkman said. "The University of Toledo has a program in place that is worded in such a way as not to make it an exclusively homosexual-coverage program. But when I asked (Miami University) how cohabitating heterosexual couples could get coverage, I was told 'they can get married.' So, in 2005, I moved forward to get Miami University to follow the law."
On Nov. 21, the Washington, D.C.-based Alliance Defense Fund - a legal alliance group founded by evangelical Christian leaders including Dr. James Dobson - announced it would appeal the decision "that a member of the state legislature lacked standing in a legal challenge" to Miami University's program.
"No one is being denied the benefits they need," said ADF senior legal counsel Jeff Shafer in a statement. "Under state law, individuals may receive benefits equally. However, Miami University's domestic partnership policy mimics marriage by creating a special legal status for same-sex couples. We believe that the judge saw the merits of our position - that the school's policy is in violation of the Constitution - and we expect that the technical issue of (Brinkman's legal) standing will be rectified on appeal...ADF and its allies will continue the legal battle to defend the Ohio Constitution from this attempted end-run by state officials." |
