Same-sex marriage cases are currently pending in Arizona, Connecticut, and Iowa.

Three other states--Hawaii, Washington, and Maine--and the District of Columbia also offer a handful of rights to same-sex couples, but fall short of the rights conferred by domestic partnerships, civil unions, or marriage.

Sponsor Message.

Defense of Marriage Acts

Some gay advocates expressed concern that the developments in San Francisco in 2004 may have hindered efforts for same-sex marriage. Indeed, President Bush referred to San Francisco and Massachusetts when he announced his decision to support a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage. But the sight of thousands of loving couples, many of whom had been together for decades, sharing vows and joining in marriage also did much to energize the proponents of same-sex marriage. San Francisco’s decision to issue licenses to same-sex couples in 2004, while perhaps not of lasting legal significance, provided huge symbolic support for marriage equality.

While there are some encouraging signs, nationally the picture looks rather bleak, particularly since the Republican Party routinely uses same-sex marriage as a "wedge issue" by which to energize its base. Following the Hawaii decision in 1993, states rushed to pass so-called "Defense of Marriage" Acts, which limit marriage to opposite-sex couples and bar recognition of any same-sex marriage or civil union from another state. Currently, more than 40 states have ordinances or constitutional amendments that limit marriage (and the recognition of out-of-state marriages) to opposite-sex couples.

The federal government passed its own Defense of Marriage Act in 1996, signed by President Clinton at midnight symbolically, if feebly, to express his disapproval. The Act defines marriage as the union of one man and one woman for all federal marital benefits and allows states to ignore the Full Faith and Credit Clause when dealing with same-sex marriages and civil unions licensed elsewhere. The constitutionality of the federal and state Defense of Marriage Acts is open to challenge, although given the conservativism of the current federal courts, such a challenge may be doomed to failure at this time.

In the 2004 general election, 13 states passed constitutional amendments banning same-sex marriage. In the 2006 general election, another seven states adopted constitutional amendments banning same-sex marriage. However, in some of these states--Virginia and Wisconsin, for example--the 2006 amendments only barely passed, and in one state, Arizona, it failed, while in Colorado an amendment creating domestic partnerships almost passed.

What is especially disturbing about these amendments is that many of them ban not just same-sex marriage, but all forms of state recognition of same-sex couples. The new Michigan amendment, for example, was interpreted by the Michigan Attorney General to mean that municipalities may not extend domestic partnership health care benefits to same-sex couples, an interpretation upheld by the state's conservative Supreme Court.

Amendments this sweeping may, however, be subject to attack under the United States Supreme Court's decision in Romer v. Evans. A federal district court in Nebraska struck down that state's extreme anti-marriage amendment under Romer v. Evans, though it was reinstated by a federal appeals court, and is now being appealed to the U. S. Supreme Court.

European Registered Partnerships

The United States lags a good deal behind some other countries with regard to recognizing same-sex unions. Denmark was the first country in the world to enact a registered partnership law for same-sex couples in 1989. Norway was next in 1993, and then Sweden (1995), Iceland (1996), and the Netherlands (1998). The Danish, Norwegian, Icelandic, and Swedish partnership acts are available to same-sex couples only, while the Dutch law is available to same-sex and opposite sex couples.

The European registered partnership acts essentially treat partners as if they were married, but with some exceptions, the most important of which being that none of them allow for joint adoption.

In 2005, Great Britain permitted same-sex couples to enter into civil partnerships that confer all the rights and responsibilities of marriage but that cannot be called marriage.

British Prime Minister Tony Blair hailed the civil partnership law as a "landmark measure" that "gives gay and lesbian couples who register their relationship the same safeguards over inheritance, insurance and employment and pension benefits as married couples. . . . No longer will same sex couples who have decided to share their lives fear that they will be denied a say over the partner’s medical treatment or find themselves denied a home if their partner dies."