Connecticut's
civil unions law heads to court in a battle with nationwide
implications

Connecticut's civil unions law, the first in the nation passed without court intervention, faces a stern test in the state supreme court on Monday.

Eight gay and lesbian couples say the state's refusal to grant marriage licenses violates their constitutional rights and denies them the financial, social, and emotional benefits of marriage.

Anne Stanback, president of the group Love Makes a Family, and a handful of same-sex-marriage supporters, were among the first to arrive at the supreme court on Monday morning.

''We got here early because we wanted to make sure we were part of the history,'' Stanback said.

She and her partner of 23 years have not had a civil union because they are waiting for full marriage rights.

A ruling in their favor could have nationwide implications for states that have adopted or are considering civil union-like legislation. Connecticut in 2005 passed a civil unions law, which state officials say gives same-sex couples the equality they seek.

Currently, only Massachusetts allows same-sex couples to marry. Connecticut, Vermont, California, New Jersey, Maine, and Washington have laws allowing either civil unions or domestic partnerships, as does the District of Columbia. Hawaii extends certain spousal rights to same-sex couples and cohabiting heterosexual pairs.

The Connecticut couples, who have been together between 10 and 32 years, say civil unions are inferior to marriage and violate their rights to equal protection and due process.

Married couples have federal rights related to taxes, Social Security beneficiary rules, veterans' benefits, and other laws that people in civil unions don't have.

Because civil unions aren't recognized nationwide, other rights, such as the ability to make medical decisions for an incapacitated partner, disappear when couples cross state lines.

The Connecticut couples' claim was dismissed by a lower court last year when a judge said they received the equality they sought when Connecticut passed a same-sex civil unions law. The couples appealed.

The state Department of Public Health and the Madison town clerk's office were named as defendants in the case after denying marriage licenses to the couples based on state attorney general Richard Blumenthal's advice.

''Our basic argument is, the trial court correctly recognized that there is a rational basis for the state to use a different name for the same rights and benefits accorded same-sex couples,'' Blumenthal said. ''The rights and benefits are identical, whether the union is called a civil union or a marriage.''

A bill is pending in Connecticut's legislature to approve same-sex marriage, but leaders of the judiciary committee say they want to pull it from consideration this session because they do not believe enough lawmakers would vote to approve it.

Republican governor M. Jodi Rell, who signed the civil unions bill into law in 2005, has said she would veto a same-sex marriage bill. Rell has said she believes marriage is between one man and one woman.

Connecticut's supreme court will not rule immediately Monday after the arguments are presented. It is not expected to announce its decision until later this year.

A similar case is pending before California's high court. (Stephanie Reitz, AP)