Recognition of same-sex unions in Vermont

Vermont recognizes civil unions, but not marriage, of same-sex couples in accordance with a law that went into effect in 2000. Parties to a civil union are given all the same benefits, protections and responsibilities under Vermont law, whether they derive from statute, administrative or court rule, policy, common law or any other source of civil law, as are granted to spouses in a marriage. Federal rights and responsibilities of marriage are still unavailable under federal law to same-sex couples and other unmarried partners. Only a change in federal law will allow Vermont same-sex couples full equality under the law.

pecifics

Eligibility

A couple that wishes to be united in civil union must meet the following requirements:
* Neither party may be party to another civil union or a marriage or a party in a legal reciprocal beneficiary relationship.
* Both parties must be of the same sex.
* Parties may not be close family members.
* Both parties must be at least 18 years of age.
* Both parties must be mentally competent.
* Neither party may be under guardianship, unless the guardian consents in writing.

Registration and dissolution

The requirements for entering into and dissolving a civil union are substantially the same as those for entering into and dissolving a marriage under Vermont law. There is no residency requirement for entering into a civil union, but there is a six-month residency requirement for dissolving a civil union.

History

On December 20, 1999 the Vermont Supreme Court ruled in Baker v. Vermont that same-sex couples are “entitled under Chapter I, Article 7, of the Vermont Constitution to obtain the same benefits and protections afforded by Vermont law to married opposite-sex couples”. The Court did not rule on whether Vermont was required to grant marriage licenses to same-sex couples, but suggested that the legislature could enact a parallel licensing scheme affording the same substantial benefits as marriage to same-sex couples. After very contentious debate, the legislature followed the Court’s suggestion and passed H.B. 847, which was signed on April 26, 2000 by Governor Howard Dean . [cite web |url=http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-4419755/Planning-in-Vermont-5-years.html |title=Planning in Vermont-5 years after the civil union law] The law went into effect on July 1, 2000. Vermont thus became the second U.S. state (after California) to offer legal status to same-sex couples, and the first to offer a civil union status encompassing the same legal rights and responsibilities of marriage.

Recognition outside of Vermont

Despite the "full faith and credit" clause of the United States Constitution, civil unions are generally not recognized outside of the state of Vermont in the absence of specific legislation. The controversial Defense of Marriage Act purports to prevent obligatory recognition of same-sex unions in other jurisdictions. As far as voluntary recognition of civil unions in other jurisdictions is concerned, California’s domestic partnership laws apparently recognize Vermont civil unions as of January 1, 2005. New York City's Domestic Partnership Law, passed in 2002, also recognizes civil unions formalized in other jurisdictions. Germany's international private law (Art. 17b EGBGB) also accords to Vermont civil unions the same benefits and responsibilities that apply in Vermont, as long as they do not exceed the standard accorded by German law to a German civil union. The United Kingdom fully recognises civil unions contracted in Vermont. Schedule 20 of the Civil Partnership Act 2004 provides for automatic recognition of specified overseas relationships to the same extent as British civil partnerships. Since legal recognition available in the United Kingdom under the Civil Partnership Act greatly exceeds the capabilities of Vermont state law, the rights and responsibilities attached are greatly enhanced.

Civil unions can be dissolved in Vermont family court in exactly the same manner as divorce of married couples. But while there is no residency requirement to contract a civil union, there is a six-month residency requirement to dissolve one. The attempt of Glen Rosengarten to obtain, in his home state of Connecticut, a formal dissolution of his Vermont civil union with Peter Downes, then a resident of New York City, was rejected by the court of appeals on the basis of lack of jurisdiction. This was the first case of a non-Vermont resident seeking a dissolution of a civil union, and it seems reasonable to anticipate difficulty in other such cases.

Controversy and same-sex marriage

Vermont civil unions were hailed by some observers as a fair compromise between those who favor legal equality for same-sex couples and those who would limit marriage to opposite-sex couples. Many gay rights advocates are hopeful that the law will act as a “stepping stone” towards obtaining greater recognition for same-sex couples in the United States and internationally, and ultimately lead to full marriage equality. Other gay rights advocates are more critical of civil unions, drawing comparisons to the “separate but equal” justification for school segregation that was rejected by the United States Supreme Court in "Brown v. Board of Education". Furthermore, they point out that civil unions can never be truly equal to marriage. The very fact of being forced into separate institution, it is argued, will always stigmatize same-sex couples, treating them as inferior and not worthy of full equality. Gay rights opponents, on the other hand, tend to oppose civil unions because they feel that same-sex couples do not deserve equality under the law, nor even the most minimal government recognition. Many anti-gay opponents of civil unions had wanted the legislature to openly defy the "Baker v. Vermont" ruling. They support proposed constitutional amendments on the state and/or federal level that would deny equality under the law to same-sex couples.

On Feb 9 2007 [http://www.leg.state.vt.us/database/status/summary.cfm?Bill=H.0275&Session=2008 state legislature bill H275] was introduced to provide for same-sex marriage and on 25 July 2007, Democratic House and Senate leaders in the state legislature announced the creation of a committee to study the issue of same-sex marriage. The committee reported in April 2008 but declined to make a recommendation. Legislation is expected in 2009. ^{[http://www.boston.com/news/local/vermont/articles/2008/04/21/vt_commission_struggles_to_remain_neutral_on_gay_marriage/]}

ee also

* Same-sex marriage in the United States
* Same-sex marriage legislation in the United States
* Same-sex marriage in the United States by state
* Same-sex marriage in the United States public opinion
* Same-sex marriage status in the United States by state
* List of benefits of marriage in the United States
* Defense of Marriage Act
* Marriage Protection Act
* Defense of marriage amendment
* Federal Marriage Amendment
* Domestic partnerships in the United States
* Freedom to Marry Coalition
* History of civil marriage in the U.S.

References