LAMBDA LEGAL ARCHIVE SITETHIS SITE IS NO LONGER MAINTAINED. TO SEE OUR MOST RECENT CASES AND NEWS, VISITNEW LAMBDALEGAL.ORG

Fact Sheet

Alabama

Constitutional Law:

AL CONST 2005-35 (Approved 2006)

(a) This amendment shall be known and may be cited as the Sanctity of Marriage Amendment.

(b) Marriage is inherently a unique relationship between a man and a woman. As a matter of public policy, this state has a special interest in encouraging, supporting, and protecting this unique relationship in order to promote, among other goals, the stability and welfare of society and its children. A marriage contracted between individuals of the same sex is invalid in this state.

(c) Marriage is a sacred covenant, solemnized between a man and a woman, which, when the legal capacity and consent of both parties is present, establishes their relationship as husband and wife, and which is recognized by the state as a civil contract.

(d) No marriage license shall be issued in the State of Alabama to parties of the same sex.

(e) The State of Alabama shall not recognize as valid any marriage of parties of the same sex that occurred or was alleged to have occurred as a result of the law of any jurisdiction regardless of whether a marriage license was issued.

(f) The State of Alabama shall not recognize as valid any common law marriage of parties of the same sex.

(g) A union replicating marriage of or between persons of the same sex in the State of Alabama or in any other jurisdiction shall be considered and treated in all respects as having no legal force or effect in this state and shall not be recognized by this state as a marriage or other union replicating marriage.

Statutory Law:

AL ST § 30-1-19 (Approved 1998)

(a) This section shall be known and may be cited as the "Alabama Marriage Protection Act."

(b) Marriage is inherently a unique relationship between a man and a woman. As a matter of public policy, this state has a special interest in encouraging, supporting, and protecting the unique relationship in order to promote, among other goals, the stability and welfare of society and its children. A marriage contracted between individuals of the same sex is invalid in this state.

(c) Marriage is a sacred covenant, solemnized between a man and a woman, which, when the legal capacity and consent of both parties is present, establishes their relationship as husband and wife, and which is recognized by the state as a civil contract.

(d) No marriage license shall be issued in the State of Alabama to parties of the same sex.

(e) The State of Alabama shall not recognize as valid any marriage of parties of the same sex that occurred or was alleged to have occurred as a result of the law of any jurisdiction regardless of whether a marriage license was issued.

Alaska

Constitutional Law:

AK CONST Art. 1, § 25 (Approved 1998)

To be valid or recognized in this State, a marriage may exist only between one man and one woman.

Statutory Law:

AK ST § 25.05.011

(a) Marriage is a civil contract entered into by one man and one woman that requires both a license and solemnization.

AK ST § 25.05.013

(a) A marriage entered into by persons of the same sex, either under common law or under statute, that is recognized by another state or foreign jurisdiction is void in this state, and contractual rights granted by virtue of the marriage, including its termination, are unenforceable in this state.

(b) A same-sex relationship may not be recognized by the state as being entitled to the benefits of marriage.

Arizona

Constitutional Law:

AZ CONST. Art. 30 § 1 (Proposition 102, Approved 2008)

Section 1. Only a union of one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in this state.

Statutory Law:

AZ ST § 25-101

C. Marriage between persons of the same sex is void and prohibited.

AZ ST § 25-112

A. Marriages valid by the laws of the place where contracted are valid in this state, except marriages that are void and prohibited by § 25-101.

B. Marriages solemnized in another state or country by parties intending at the time to reside in this state shall have the same legal consequences and effect as if solemnized in this state, except marriages that are void and prohibited by § 25-101.

C. Parties residing in this state may not evade the laws of this state relating to marriage by going to another state or country for solemnization of the marriage.

Arkansas

Constitutional Law:

AR CONST Amend. 83, § 1 (Approved 2004)

Marriage consists only of the union of one man and one woman.

AR CONST Amend. 83, § 2

Legal status for unmarried persons which is identical or substantially similar to marital status shall not be valid or recognized in Arkansas, except that the legislature may recognize a common law marriage from another state between a man and a woman.

AR CONST Amend. 83, § 3

The Legislature has the power to determine the capacity of persons to marry, subject to this amendment, and the legal rights, obligations, privileges, and immunities of marriage.

Statutory Law:

AR ST § 9-11-107

(a) All marriages contracted outside this state which would be valid by the laws of the state or country in which the marriages were consummated and in which the parties then actually resided shall be valid in all the courts in this state.

(b) This section shall not apply to a marriage between persons of the same sex.

AR ST § 9-11-109

Marriage shall be only between a man and a woman. A marriage between persons of the same sex is void.

AR ST § 9-11-208

(b) It shall be the declared public policy of the State of Arkansas to recognize the marital union only of man and woman. No license shall be issued to persons to marry another person of the same sex and no same-sex marriage shall be recognized as entitled to the benefits of marriage.

(c) Marriages between persons of the same sex are prohibited in this state. Any marriage entered into by persons of the same sex, where a marriage license is issued by another state or by a foreign jurisdiction, shall be void in Arkansas and any contractual or other rights granted by virtue of that license, including its termination, shall be unenforceable in the Arkansas courts.

(d) However, nothing in this section shall prevent an employer from extending benefits to persons who are domestic partners of employees.

California

Constitutional Law:

CA CONST. Art. I, Section 7.5 (Proposition 8, Approved 2008)

Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.

Statutory Law:

CA FAM § 300

Marriage is a personal relation arising out of a civil contract between a man and a woman…

CA FAM § 308.5

Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.

Colorado

Constitutional Law:

CO CONST Art. 2, § 31 (Approved 2006)

Only a union of one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in this state.

Statutory Law:

CO ST § 14-2-104

(1) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (3) of this section, a marriage is valid in this state if:

(a) It is licensed, solemnized, and registered as provided in this part 1; and

(b) It is only between one man and one woman.

(2) Notwithstanding the provisions of section 14-2-112, any marriage contracted within or outside this state that does not satisfy paragraph (b) of subsection (1) of this section shall not be recognized as valid in this state.

Florida

Constitutional Law:

FL CONST Art. 1 § 27 (Proposition 2, Approved 2008)

Marriage defined.—Inasmuch as marriage is the legal union of only one man and one woman as husband and wife, no other legal union that is treated as marriage or the substantial equivalent thereof shall be valid or recognized.

Statutory Law:

FL ST § 741.04

(1) No county court judge or clerk of the circuit court in this state shall issue a license for the marriage of any person…unless one party is a male and the other party is a female.

FL ST § 741.212

(1) Marriages between persons of the same sex entered into in any jurisdiction, whether within or outside the State of Florida, the United States, or any other jurisdiction, either domestic or foreign, or any other place or location, or relationships between persons of the same sex which are treated as marriages in any jurisdiction, whether within or outside the State of Florida, the United States, or any other jurisdiction, either domestic or foreign, or any other place or location, are not recognized for any purpose in this state.

(2) The state, its agencies, and its political subdivisions may not give effect to any public act, record, or judicial proceeding of any state, territory, possession, or tribe of the United States or of any other jurisdiction, either domestic or foreign, or any other place or location respecting either a marriage or relationship not recognized under subsection (1) or a claim arising from such a marriage or relationship.

(3) For purposes of interpreting any state statute or rule, the term "marriage" means only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife, and the term "spouse" applies only to a member of such a union.

Georgia

Constitutional Law:

GA CONST Art. 1, § 4, P I (Approved 2004)

(a) This state shall recognize as marriage only the union of man and woman. Marriages between persons of the same sex are prohibited in this state.

(b) No union between persons of the same sex shall be recognized by this state as entitled to the benefits of marriage. This state shall not give effect to any public act, record, or judicial proceeding of any other state or jurisdiction respecting a relationship between persons of the same sex that is treated as a marriage under the laws of such other state or jurisdiction. The courts of this state shall have no jurisdiction to grant a divorce or separate maintenance with respect to any such relationship or otherwise to consider or rule on any of the parties' respective rights arising as a result of or in connection with such relationship.

Statutory Law:

GA ST § 19-3-3.1

(a) It is declared to be the public policy of this state to recognize the union only of man and woman. Marriages between persons of the same sex are prohibited in this state.

(b) No marriage between persons of the same sex shall be recognized as entitled to the benefits of marriage. Any marriage entered into by persons of the same sex pursuant to a marriage license issued by another state or foreign jurisdiction or otherwise shall be void in this state. Any contractual rights granted by virtue of such license shall be unenforceable in the courts of this state and the courts of this state shall have no jurisdiction whatsoever under any circumstances to grant a divorce or separate maintenance with respect to such marriage or otherwise to consider or rule on any of the parties' respective rights arising as a result of or in connection with such marriage.

Hawaii

Constitutional Law:

HI CONST Art. 1, § 23

The legislature shall have the power to reserve marriage to opposite-sex couples.

Statutory Law:

HI ST § 572-1 [T]he marriage contract…shall be only between a man and a woman…

HI ST § 572-1.5 Whenever used in the statutes or other laws of Hawaii, ‘marriage’ means the union licensed under section 572-1.

HI ST § 572-1.6 Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to render unlawful, or otherwise affirmatively punishable at law, the solemnization of same-sex relationships by religious organizations; provided that nothing in this section shall be construed to confer any of the benefits, burdens, or obligations of marriage under the laws of Hawaii.

Idaho

Constitutional Law:

ID CONST Art. III, § 28 (Approved 2006)

A marriage between a man and a woman is the only domestic legal union that shall be valid or recognized in this state.

Statutory Law:

ID ST § 32-201

(1) Marriage is a personal relation arising out of a civil contract between a man and a woman…

ID ST § 32-209

All marriages contracted without this state, which would be valid by the laws of the state or country in which the same were contracted, are valid in this state, unless they violate the public policy of this state. Marriages that violate the public policy of this state include, but are not limited to, same-sex marriages, and marriages entered into under the laws of another state or country with the intent to evade the prohibitions of the marriage laws of this state.

Illinois

Statutory Law:

IL ST CH 750 § 5/201

A marriage between a man and a woman licensed, solemnized and registered as provided in this Act is valid in this State.

IL ST CH 750 § 5/212

(a) The following marriages are prohibited:

(5) a marriage between 2 individuals of the same sex.

IL ST CH 750 § 5/213.1

A marriage between 2 individuals of the same sex is contrary to the public policy of this State.

Indiana

Statutory Law:

IN ST 31-11-1-1

(a) Only a female may marry a male. Only a male may marry a female.

(b) A marriage between persons of the same gender is void in Indiana even if the marriage is lawful in the place where it is solemnized.

Kansas

Constitutional Law:

KS CONST Art. 15, § 16 (Approved 2005)

(a) The marriage contract is to be considered in law as a civil contract. Marriage shall be constituted by one man and one woman only. All other marriages are declared to be contrary to the public policy of this state and are void.

(b) No relationship, other than a marriage, shall be recognized by the state as entitling the parties to the rights or incidents of marriage.

Statutory Law:

KS ST § 23-101

(a) The marriage contract is to be considered in law as a civil contract between two parties who are of opposite sex. All other marriages are declared to be contrary to the public policy of this state and are void. The consent of the parties is essential. The marriage ceremony may be regarded either as a civil ceremony or as a religious sacrament, but the marriage relation shall only be entered into, maintained or abrogated as provided by law.

KS ST § 23-115

It is the strong public policy of this state only to recognize as valid marriages from other states that are between a man and a woman.

Kentucky

Constitutional Law:

KY Const § 233A (Approved 2004)

Only a marriage between one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in Kentucky. A legal status identical or substantially similar to that of marriage for unmarried individuals shall not be valid or recognized.

Statutory Law:

KY ST § 402.005

As used and recognized in the law of the Commonwealth, "marriage" refers only to the civil status, condition, or relation of one (1) man and one (1) woman united in law for life, for the discharge to each other and the community of the duties legally incumbent upon those whose association is founded on the distinction of sex.

KY ST § 402.020

(1) Marriage is prohibited and void:

(d) Between members of the same sex

KY ST § 402.040

(2) A marriage between members of the same sex is against Kentucky public policy and shall be subject to the prohibitions established in KRS 402.045.

KY ST § 402.045

(1) A marriage between members of the same sex which occurs in another jurisdiction shall be void in Kentucky.

(2) Any rights granted by virtue of the marriage, or its termination, shall be unenforceable in Kentucky courts.

Louisiana

Constitutional Law:

LA CONST Art. 12, § 15 (Approved 2004)

Marriage in the state of Louisiana shall consist only of the union of one man and one woman. No official or court of the state of Louisiana shall construe this constitution or any state law to require that marriage or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon any member of a union other than the union of one man and one woman. A legal status identical or substantially similar to that of marriage for unmarried individuals shall not be valid or recognized. No official or court of the state of Louisiana shall recognize any marriage contracted in any other jurisdiction which is not the union of one man and one woman.

Statutory Law:

LA C.C. Art. 86

Marriage is a legal relationship between a man and a woman

LA C.C. Art. 89

Persons of the same sex may not contract marriage with each other. A purported marriage between persons of the same sex contracted in another state shall be governed by the provisions of Title II of Book IV of the Civil Code.

LA C.C. Art. 96

A purported marriage between parties of the same sex does not produce any civil effects.

LA C.C. Art. 3520

A. A marriage that is valid in the state where contracted, or in the state where the parties were first domiciled as husband and wife, shall be treated as a valid marriage unless to do so would violate a strong public policy of the state whose law is applicable to the particular issue under Article 3519.

B. A purported marriage between persons of the same sex violates a strong public policy of the state of Louisiana and such a marriage contracted in another state shall not be recognized in this state for any purpose, including the assertion of any right or claim as a result of the purported marriage.

Michigan

Constitutional Law:

MI CONST Art. 1, § 25 (Approved 2004)

To secure and preserve the benefits of marriage for our society and for future generations of children, the union of one man and one woman in marriage shall be the only agreement recognized as a marriage or similar union for any purpose.

Statutory Law:

MI ST 551.1

Marriage is inherently a unique relationship between a man and a woman. As a matter of public policy, this state has a special interest in encouraging, supporting, and protecting that unique relationship in order to promote, among other goals, the stability and welfare of society and its children. A marriage contracted between individuals of the same sex is invalid in this state.

MI ST 551.2

So far as its validity in law is concerned, marriage is a civil contract between a man and a woman…

MI ST 551.271

 (1) Except as otherwise provided in this act, a marriage contracted between a man and a woman who are residents of this state and who were, at the time of the marriage, legally competent to contract marriage according to the laws of this state, which marriage is solemnized in another state within the United States by a clergyman, magistrate, or other person legally authorized to solemnize marriages within that state, is a valid and binding marriage under the laws of this state to the same effect and extent as if solemnized within this state and according to its laws .

(2) This section does not apply to a marriage contracted between individuals of the same sex, which marriage is invalid in this state under section 1 of chapter 83 of the revised statutes of 1846, being section 551.1 of the Michigan Compiled Laws.

MI ST 551.272

This state recognizes marriage as inherently a unique relationship between a man and a woman, as prescribed by section 1 of chapter 83 of the revised statutes of 1846, being section 551.1 of the Michigan Compiled Laws, and therefore a marriage that is not between a man and a woman is invalid in this state regardless of whether the marriage is contracted according to the laws of another jurisdiction.

Mississippi

Constitutional Law:

MS CONST Art. 14, § 263A (Approved 2004)

Marriage may take place and may be valid under the laws of this state only between a man and a woman. A marriage in another state or foreign jurisdiction between persons of the same gender, regardless of when the marriage took place, may not be recognized in this state and is void and unenforceable under the laws of this state.

Statutory Law:

MS ST § 93-1-1

(2) Any marriage between persons of the same gender is prohibited and null and void from the beginning. Any marriage between persons of the same gender that is valid in another jurisdiction does not constitute a legal or valid marriage in Mississippi.

MS ST § 93-1-3

Any attempt to evade section 93-1-1 by marrying out of this state and returning to it shall be within the prohibitions of said section.

Missouri

Constitutional Law:

MO CONST Art. 1, § 33 (Approved 2004)

That to be valid and recognized in this state, a marriage shall exist only between a man and a woman.

Statutory Law:

MO ST 451.022

1. It is the public policy of this state to recognize marriage only between a man and a woman.

2. Any purported marriage not between a man and a woman is invalid.

3. No recorder shall issue a marriage license, except to a man and a woman.

4. A marriage between persons of the same sex will not be recognized for any purpose in this state even when valid where contracted.

Montana

Constitutional Law:

MT CONST Art. 13, § 7 (Approved 2004)

Only a marriage between one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in this state.

Statutory Law:

MT ST 40-1-103

Marriage is a personal relationship between a man and a woman…

MT ST 40-1-401

 (1) The following marriages are prohibited:

(d) a marriage between persons of the same sex.

(4) A contractual relationship entered into for the purpose of achieving a civil relationship that is prohibited under subsection (1) is void as against public policy.

Nebraska

Constitutional Law:

NE CONST Art. I, § 29 (Approved 2000)

Only marriage between a man and a woman shall be valid or recognized in Nebraska. The uniting of two persons of the same sex in a civil union, domestic partnership, or other similar same-sex relationship shall not be valid or recognized in Nebraska.

Nevada

Constitutional Law:

NV CONST Art. 1, § 21 (Approved 2000 and 2002)

Only a marriage between a male and female person shall be recognized and given effect in this state.

New Mexico

Statutory Law:

NM ST § 40-1-1

Marriage is contemplated by the law as a civil contract, for which the consent of the contracting parties, capable in law of contracting, is essential.

NM ST § 40-1-10

Each couple desiring to marry in New Mexico shall obtain a license from a county clerk and file the same for recording in the county issuing the license, following the marriage ceremony. Except as provided in Section 40-1-6 NMSA 1978, a county clerk shall issue no license for the marriage of any person under the age of majority without the consent of his parent or guardian. It shall be the duty of each county clerk to require the affidavit of at least two reliable persons who are acquainted with the age of the applicant for license, as to the age of whom a county clerk may be in doubt, and the failure of any county clerk to perform his duty under this section shall be grounds for the removal of the county clerk from office, in the manner provided for the removal from office of county officers for misfeasance or malfeasance in office.

Letter from Patricia A. Madrid, Attorney General, State of New Mexico, to Senator Timothy Z. Jennings (Feb. 20, 2004), available at: http://www.ago.state.nm.us/divs/civil/opinions/a2004/SameSexMarriages.htm.

New Mexico statutes, as they currently exist, contemplate that marriage will be between a man and a woman. The New Mexico legislature has adopted a marriage application form that requires a male applicant and a female applicant. See NMSA 1978, Section 40-1-18. The rights of married persons are set forth as applicable to a husband and a wife. See NMSA 1978, Sections 40-2-1 through 40-2-9. The property rights of married persons are expressed as existing between a husband and a wife. See NMSA 1978, Sections 40-3-1 through 40-3-17. The evidentiary privilege between spouses, as established by the New Mexico Supreme Court, is limited to communications that occur while the parties are husband and wife. See Rule 11-505 (B) NMRA. The generally accepted definition of “Husband” is a married man. Black’s Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition. “Wife” is defined as a woman united to a man by marriage. Id. Thus, it appears that the present policy of New Mexico is to limit marriage to a man and a woman.

Thus, in my judgment, no county clerk should issue a marriage license to same sex couples because those licenses would be invalid under current law.

North Carolina

Constitutional Law:

A state constitutional amendment was voted into effect on May 8, 2012, banning same-sex unions and defining marriage between a man and a woman as the only valid "domestic legal union" in the state.

Statutory Law:

NC ST § 51-1

A valid and sufficient marriage is created by the consent of a male and female person who may lawfully marry, presently to take each other as husband and wife…

NC ST § 51-1.2

Marriages, whether created by common law, contracted, or performed outside of North Carolina, between individuals of the same gender are not valid in North Carolina.

North Dakota

Constitutional Law:

ND CONST Art. 11, § 28 (Approved 2004)

Marriage consists only of the legal union between a man and a woman. No other domestic union, however denominated, may be recognized as a marriage or given the same or substantially equivalent legal effect.

Statutory Law:

ND ST 14-03-01

Marriage is a personal relation arising out of a civil contract between one man and one woman to which the consent of the parties is essential. The marriage relation may be entered into, maintained, annulled, or dissolved only as provided by law. A spouse refers only to a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife.

ND ST 14-03-08

Except when residents of this state contract a marriage in another state which is prohibited under the laws of this state, all marriages contracted outside this state, which are valid according to the laws of the state or country where contracted, are valid in this state. This section applies only to a marriage contracted in another state or country which is between one man and one woman as husband and wife.

Ohio

Constitutional Law:

OH CONST Art. XV, § 11 (Approved 2004)

Only a union between one man and one woman may be a marriage valid in or recognized by this state and its political subdivisions. This state and its political subdivisions shall not create or recognize a legal status for relationships of unmarried individuals that intends to approximate the design, qualities, significance or effect of marriage.

Statutory Law:

OH ST § 3101.01

(A) … A marriage may only be entered into by one man and one woman. …

(C)

(1) Any marriage between persons of the same sex is against the strong public policy of this state. Any marriage between persons of the same sex shall have no legal force or effect in this state and, if attempted to be entered into in this state, is void ab initio and shall not be recognized by this state.

(2) Any marriage entered into by persons of the same sex in any other jurisdiction shall be considered and treated in all respects as having no legal force or effect in this state and shall not be recognized by this state.

(3) The recognition or extension by the state of the specific statutory benefits of a legal marriage to nonmarital relationships between persons of the same sex or different sexes is against the strong public policy of this state. Any public act, record, or judicial proceeding of this state, as defined in section 9.82 of the Revised Code, that extends the specific statutory benefits of legal marriage to nonmarital relationships between persons of the same sex or different sexes is void ab initio. Nothing in division (C)(3) of this section shall be construed to do either of the following:

(a) Prohibit the extension of specific benefits otherwise enjoyed by all persons, married or unmarried, to nonmarital relationships between persons of the same sex or different sexes, including the extension of benefits conferred by any statute that is not expressly limited to married persons, which includes but is not limited to benefits available under Chapter 4117. of the Revised Code;

(b) Affect the validity of private agreements that are otherwise valid under the laws of this state.

(4) Any public act, record, or judicial proceeding of any other state, country, or other jurisdiction outside this state that extends the specific benefits of legal marriage to nonmarital relationships between persons of the same sex or different sexes shall be considered and treated in all respects as having no legal force or effect in this state and shall not be recognized by this state.

Oklahoma

Constitutional Law:

OK CONST Art. 2, § 35 (Approved 2004)

A. Marriage in this state shall consist only of the union of one man and one woman. Neither this Constitution nor any other provision of law shall be construed to require that marital status or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon unmarried couples or groups.

B. A marriage between persons of the same gender performed in another state shall not be recognized as valid and binding in this state as of the date of the marriage.

C. Any person knowingly issuing a marriage license in violation of this section shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.

Statutory Law:

OK ST T. 43 § 3

A. Any unmarried person who is at least eighteen (18) years of age and not otherwise disqualified is capable of contracting and consenting to marriage with a person of the opposite sex.

OK ST T. 43 § 3.1

A marriage between persons of the same gender performed in another state shall not be recognized as valid and binding in this state as of the date of the marriage.

Oregon

Constitutional Law:

OR CONST Art. XV, § 5a (Approved 2004)

It is the policy of Oregon, and its political subdivisions, that only a marriage between one man and one woman shall be valid or legally recognized as a marriage.

Statutory Law:

OR ST § 106.010 Marriage as civil contract; age of parties. Marriage is a civil contract entered into in person by males at least 17 years of age and females at least 17 years of age, who are otherwise capable, and solemnized in accordance with ORS 106.150.

OR ST § 106.300 to 106.340 DOMESTIC PARTNERSHIP

May be cited as the Oregon Family Fairness Act

OR ST § 106.310 (1) “Domestic partnership” means a civil contract described in ORS 106.300 to 106.340 entered into in person between two individuals of the same sex who are at least 18 years of age, who are otherwise capable and at least one of whom is a resident of Oregon.

OR ST § 106.340 Certain privileges, immunities, rights, benefits and responsibilities granted or imposed. (1) Any privilege, immunity, right or benefit granted by statute, administrative or court rule, policy, common law or any other law to an individual because the individual is or was married, or because the individual is or was an in-law in a specified way to another individual, is granted on equivalent terms, substantive and procedural, to an individual because the individual is or was in a domestic partnership or because the individual is or was, based on a domestic partnership, related in a specified way to another individual.

(2) Any responsibility imposed by statute, administrative or court rule, policy, common law or any other law on an individual because the individual is or was married, or because the individual is or was an in-law in a specified way to another individual, is imposed on equivalent terms, substantive and procedural, on an individual because the individual is or was in a domestic partnership or because the individual is or was, based on a domestic partnership, related in a specified way to another individual.

(3) Any privilege, immunity, right, benefit or responsibility granted or imposed by statute, administrative or court rule, policy, common law or any other law to or on a spouse with respect to a child of either of the spouses is granted or imposed on equivalent terms, substantive and procedural, to or on a partner with respect to a child of either of the partners.

(4) Any privilege, immunity, right, benefit or responsibility granted or imposed by statute, administrative or court rule, policy, common law or any other law to or on a former or surviving spouse with respect to a child of either of the spouses is granted or imposed on equivalent terms, substantive and procedural, to or on a former or surviving partner with respect to a child of either of the partners.

(8) For purposes of administering Oregon tax laws, partners in a domestic partnership, surviving partners in a domestic partnership and the children of partners in a domestic partnership have the same privileges, immunities, rights, benefits and responsibilities as are granted to or imposed on spouses in a marriage, surviving spouses and their children.

Pennsylvania

Statutory Law:

PA ST 23 Pa.C.S.A. § 1704

It is hereby declared to be the strong and longstanding public policy of this Commonwealth that marriage shall be between one man and one woman. A marriage between persons of the same sex which was entered into in another state or foreign jurisdiction, even if valid where entered into, shall be void in this Commonwealth

South Carolina

Constitutional Law: (Approved 2006)

SC CONST Art. XVII, § 15

Lawful domestic unions recognizable in State; domestic unions created in another jurisdiction.

A marriage between one man and one woman is the only lawful domestic union that shall be valid or recognized in this State. This State and its political subdivisions shall not create a legal status, right, or claim respecting any other domestic union, however denominated. This State and its political subdivisions shall not recognize or give effect to a legal status, right, or claim created by another jurisdiction respecting any other domestic union, however denominated. Nothing in this section shall impair any right or benefit extended by the State or its political subdivisions other than a right or benefit arising from a domestic union that is not valid or recognized in this State. This section shall not prohibit or limit parties, other than the State or its political subdivisions, from entering into contracts or other legal instruments.

Statutory Law:

SC ST § 20-1-15

A marriage between persons of the same sex is void ab initio and against the public policy of this State.

South Dakota

Constitutional Law: (Approved 2006)

SD CONST Art. 21, § 9

Only marriage between a man and a woman shall be valid or recognized in South Dakota. The uniting of two or more persons in a civil union, domestic partnership, or other quasi-marital relationship shall not be valid or recognized in South Dakota.

Statutory Law:

SD ST § 25-1-1

Marriage is a personal relation, between a man and a woman…

SD ST § 25-1-38

Any marriage contracted outside the jurisdiction of this state, except a marriage contracted between two persons of the same gender, which is valid by the laws of the jurisdiction in which such marriage was contracted, is valid in this state.

Tennessee

Constitutional Law: (Approved 2006)

TN CONST Art. 11, § 18

The historical institution and legal contract solemnizing the relationship of one man and one woman shall be the only legally recognized marital contract in this state. Any policy or law or judicial interpretation, purporting to define marriage as anything other than the historical institution and legal contract between one man and one woman, is contrary to the public policy of this state and shall be void and unenforceable in Tennessee. If another state or foreign jurisdiction issues a license for persons to marry and if such marriage is prohibited in this state by the provisions of this section, then the marriage shall be void and unenforceable in this state.

Statutory Law:

TN ST § 36-3-113

(a) Tennessee's marriage licensing laws reinforce, carry forward, and make explicit the long-standing public policy of this state to recognize the family as essential to social and economic order and the common good and as the fundamental building block of our society. To that end, it is further the public policy of this state that the historical institution and legal contract solemnizing the relationship of one (1) man and one (1) woman shall be the only legally recognized marital contract in this state in order to provide the unique and exclusive rights and privileges to marriage.

(b) The legal union in matrimony of only one (1) man and one (1) woman shall be the only recognized marriage in this state.

(c) Any policy, law or judicial interpretation that purports to define marriage as anything other than the historical institution and legal contract between one (1) man and one (1) woman is contrary to the public policy of Tennessee.

(d) If another state or foreign jurisdiction issues a license for persons to marry, which marriages are prohibited in this state, any such marriage shall be void and unenforceable in this state.

Texas

Constitutional Law:

TX CONST Art. 1, § 32

(a) Marriage in this state shall consist only of the union of one man and one woman.

(b) This state or a political subdivision of this state may not create or recognize any legal status identical or similar to marriage.

Statutory Law:

TX FAMILY § 2.001

(a) A man and a woman desiring to enter into a ceremonial marriage must obtain a marriage license from the county clerk of any county of this state.

(b) A license may not be issued for the marriage of persons of the same sex.

TX FAMILY § 6.204

 (a) In this section, "civil union" means any relationship status other than marriage that:

(1) is intended as an alternative to marriage or applies primarily to cohabitating persons; and

(2) grants to the parties of the relationship legal protections, benefits, or responsibilities granted to the spouses of a marriage.

(b) A marriage between persons of the same sex or a civil union is contrary to the public policy of this state and is void in this state.

(c) The state or an agency or political subdivision of the state may not give effect to a:

(1) public act, record, or judicial proceeding that creates, recognizes, or validates a marriage between persons of the same sex or a civil union in this state or in any other jurisdiction; or

(2) right or claim to any legal protection, benefit, or responsibility asserted as a result of a marriage between persons of the same sex or a civil union in this state or in any other jurisdiction.

Utah

Constitutional Law: (Approved 2004)

UT CONST Art. 1, § 29

(1) Marriage consists only of the legal union between a man and a woman.

(2) No other domestic union, however denominated, may be recognized as a marriage or given the same or substantially equivalent legal effect.

Statutory Law:

UT ST § 30-1-2

The following marriages are prohibited and declared void:

(5) between persons of the same sex.

UT ST § 30-1-4.1

(1)

(a) It is the policy of this state to recognize as marriage only the legal union of a man and a woman as provided in this chapter.

(b) Except for the relationship of marriage between a man and a woman recognized pursuant to this chapter, this state will not recognize, enforce, or give legal effect to any law creating any legal status, rights, benefits, or duties that are substantially equivalent to those provided under Utah law to a man and a woman because they are married.

(2) Nothing in Subsection (1) impairs any contract or other rights, benefits, or duties that are enforceable independently of this section.

Virginia

Constitutional Law: (Approved 2006)

VA CONST Art. 1, § 15-A

That only a union between one man and one woman may be a marriage valid in or recognized by this Commonwealth and its political subdivisions.

This Commonwealth and its political subdivisions shall not create or recognize a legal status for relationships of unmarried individuals that intends to approximate the design, qualities, significance, or effects of marriage. Nor shall this Commonwealth or its political subdivisions create or recognize another union, partnership, or other legal status to which is assigned the rights, benefits, obligations, qualities, or effects of marriage.

Statutory Law:

VA ST § 20-45.2

A marriage between persons of the same sex is prohibited. Any marriage entered into by persons of the same sex in another state or jurisdiction shall be void in all respects in Virginia and any contractual rights created by such marriage shall be void and unenforceable.

VA ST § 20-45.3

A civil union, partnership contract or other arrangement between persons of the same sex purporting to bestow the privileges or obligations of marriage is prohibited. Any such civil union, partnership contract or other arrangement entered into by persons of the same sex in another state or jurisdiction shall be void in all respects in Virginia and any contractual rights created thereby shall be void and unenforceable.

Washington

Statutory Law:

Same-sex marriage allowed. February 13, 2012, Washington Governor Christine Gregoire signed a same-sex marriage bill that had been passed by both houses of the state legislature. Voters approved the legislation in a referendum held on November 6, 2012. The law took effect on December 6 and the first marriages were celebrated on December 9, 2012.

West Virginia

Statutory Law:

WV ST § 48-2-603

A public act, record or judicial proceeding of any other state, territory, possession or tribe respecting a relationship between persons of the same sex that is treated as a marriage under the laws of the other state, territory, possession, or tribe, or a right or claim arising from such relationship, shall not be given effect by this state.

Wisconsin

Constitutional Law: (Approved 2006)

WI CONST Art. 13, § 13

Only a marriage between one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in this state. A legal status identical or substantially similar to that of marriage for unmarried individuals shall not be valid or recognized in this state.

Statutory Law:

WI ST 765.001

(2) Intent. It is the intent of chs. 765 to 768 to promote the stability and best interests of marriage and the family… Under the laws of this state, marriage is a legal relationship between 2 equal persons, a husband and wife, who owe to each other mutual responsibility and support.…

WI ST 765.01

Marriage, so far as its validity at law is concerned, is a civil contract, to which the consent of the parties capable in law of contracting is essential, and which creates the legal status of husband and wife.

WI ST 765.04

(1) If any person residing and intending to continue to reside in this state who is disabled or prohibited from contracting marriage under the laws of this state goes into another state or country and there contracts a marriage prohibited or declared void under the laws of this state, such marriage shall be void for all purposes in this state with the same effect as though it had been entered into in this state.

WI ST 765.30

(1) The following may be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned for not more than 9 months or both:

(a) Penalty for marriage outside the state to circumvent the laws. Any person residing and intending to continue to reside in this state who goes outside the state and there contracts a marriage prohibited or declared void under the laws of this state.

Wyoming

Statutory Law:

WY ST § 20-1-101

Marriage is a civil contract between a male and a female person…

The Illinois legislature passed the “Illinois Religious Freedom Protection and Marriage Fairness Act.” Below are answers to frequently asked questions about the new marriage law and about the recent court decision ordering the Cook County Clerk to immediately issue marriage licenses.

Please note: This document offers general information only and is not intended to provide guidance or legal advice regarding anyone’s specific situation. This is an evolving area of law in which there is bound to be uncertainty, and we will be working closely with Illinois attorneys to promote the best results. If you have additional questions, have encountered difficulty in obtaining appropriate recognition of your married status, or are looking for contact information for private attorneys who might advise you, contact Lambda Legal’s help desk at 866-542-8336 or legalhelpdesk@lambdalegal.org or the ACLU of Illinois at 312-201-9740 or www.aclu-il.org/about/requesting-legal-assistance/

April 12, 2019 is the National Day of Silence, a student-led action sponsored by the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN) in which thousands of students around the country will remain silent for all or part of the school day to call attention to the harassment and discrimination faced by lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender youth.

Over the years, GLSEN and Lambda Legal have heard from hundreds of students, parents and allies who have encountered resistance from their schools and school officials in response to their efforts to participate in Day of Silence activities. The purpose of this FAQ is to provide information about the rights of students to participate in the Day of Silence and what to do if school officials interfere with those rights.

El objetivo de este documento es ofrecer información general sobre el matrimonio civil para parejas del mismo sexo en el estado de Washington. El contenido de este documento no constituye asesoría legal. El matrimonio civil es un compromiso personal y legal importante. Antes de contraer matrimonio, las parejas deberían informarse sobre las consecuencias legales del matrimonio civil y deberían consultar a un abogado y buscar asesoría legal (y de ser posible, un asesor financiero y/o un experto en impuestos) si tuvieran preguntas sobre sus circunstancias específicas.

         

Please take note:  On June 26, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled the so-called Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) unconstitutional.  For information about how this development may potentially affect you, click here.

Before the end of this year, the U.S. Supreme Court will likely consider whether or not to hear one or more cases challenging the constitutionality of Section 3 of the so-called Defense of Marriage Act. Here are a few key things to know while we wait for that announcement. 

WHAT IS DOMA SECTION 3?

The Defense of Marriage Act was passed by Congress in 1996. Section 3 states that, for purposes of all federal laws and programs, “the word ‘marriage’ means only the legal union of a man and a woman as husband and wife, and the word ‘spouse’ refers only to a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife.” DOMA thus excludes legally married same-sex couples from any federal law or program in which marriage is a factor and treats them as single rather than married.

WHY IS IT IMPORTANT TO GET RID OF SECTION 3 OF DOMA?

It’s important to get rid of DOMA Section 3 for two reasons: (1) DOMA causes real, concrete harm to legally married same-sex couples and their families. With more than 1,000 federal laws and programs at issue, DOMA’s harm is vast. DOMA denies pensions to the surviving spouses of federal employees, prevents spouses from taking Family Medical Leave to care for one another during serious illness, separates binational couples, denies military spouses support and benefits, and costs thousands of dollars for families when spouses cannot file federal taxes jointly as married; and (2) DOMA singles out gay people and our relationships as unequal, thus inviting discrimination from others and telling our children that their families are second class.

WHAT IS BEING DONE TO DEFEAT DOMA?                  

Litigation groups including Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders (GLAD), Lambda Legal, and the ACLU have dealt significant blows to DOMA Section 3 with legal challenges: Gill et al. v. Office of Personnel Management (GLAD), Pedersen et al v. Office of Personnel Management (GLAD), Golinski v. Office of Personnel Management (Lambda Legal), and Windsor v. United States (ACLU). Courts in each of these cases have found DOMA unconstitutional on its merits. (Cases have also been brought by Immigration Equality and the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, among others.) One or more of the decided cases is likely to be heard by the U.S. Supreme Court in its 2012-2013 term, and if that happens, DOMA’s constitutionality is expected to be decided by the end of June 2013.

There is also an attempt to repeal DOMA in Congress with the Respect for Marriage Act (RMA). The bill has 157 sponsors in the House of Representatives and 33 sponsors in the Senate. The bill had a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing in July 2011, and a markup in November 2011. The committee approved the bill by a vote of 10-8. It has not yet had a floor vote.

 

Stand up to defeat DOMA. Sign our pledge now!

 

WHAT LEGAL ARGUMENTS DO THESE CASES MAKE?

These cases make equal protection arguments—that all married couples, gay and non-gay, should be treated equally by the federal government. None of these suits challenge Section 2 of DOMA (which addresses inter-state recognition) and none make a right-to-marry claim.

IF SECTION 3 OF DOMA IS STRUCK DOWN, WILL EVERY STATE HAVE TO ALLOW SAME-SEX COUPLES TO MARRY?

No—DOMA does not change state marriage laws. Section 3 of DOMA means that the federal government will not respect the legal marriages of same-sex couples. Even if Section 3 of DOMA is held unconstitutional, that ruling won’t require any new states to allow same-sex couples to marry. If DOMA is struck down, the federal government will have to respect the existing marriages of same-sex couples for purposes of all federal statutes and programs. Of course, the scope of a positive ruling will depend on the terms of the ruling itself. The marriage lawsuits that are currently pending in a number of states, as well as efforts in state legislatures seeking the freedom to marry for same-sex couples will need to continue regardless of the DOMA outcome.

HOW CAN DOMA STILL BE IN EFFECT, WHEN SO MANY COURTS HAVE STRUCK IT DOWN?

The last seven courts to consider whether or not Section 3 of DOMA is unconstitutional have all concluded that it is. None, however, is a definitive and final ruling from the U.S. Supreme Court. As a result, in nearly all circumstances, the federal government continues to enforce DOMA in relation to the 1,138 laws it affects.

WHY IS THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION NOT DEFENDING DOMA?

The Obama administration is no longer defending Section 3 of DOMA in court challenges because the President and the Department of Justice have determined that it is clearly unconstitutional. On February 23, 2011, the Attorney General Eric Holder notified Congress and Speaker of the House John Boehner that the Department would no longer argue that Section 3 of DOMA should be upheld in cases challenging it. The President and Attorney General had concluded that laws that discriminate against gay men and lesbians require the application of heightened scrutiny under the Constitution’s Equal Protection guarantee, meaning that courts must presume such laws are unconstitutional and strike them down unless there is a very strong justification for the discrimination. The President and Attorney General concluded that DOMA cannot survive that test. Since that announcement, the Department of Justice has urged several courts, including the Supreme Court, to strike down Section 3 of DOMA. Although the administration is not defending DOMA Section 3 in legal cases, it is still enforcing the law.

In response to the Attorney General’s announcement, the five leaders of the U.S. House of Representatives known as the Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group, voted 3 (Republican) to 2 (Democratic) to defend DOMA in court challenges and to hire counsel to do so. BLAG is defending DOMA in all of the cases that are now pending potential review before the Supreme Court.

WHY IS IT A GOOD IDEA TO TAKE THIS ISSUE TO THE SUPREME COURT?

Both the Gill and Windsor cases have been heard by appellate courts, which have found DOMA to be unconstitutional. These are mainstream equal protection cases involving an obvious double standard where all married people are treated the same by the federal government with the exception of same-sex couples. Equal protection cases are a routine part of the Court’s docket.

WHAT IS NEXT FOR DOMA?

After the U.S. Supreme Court decides whether or not it will grant review of one or more of the DOMA lawsuits, those cases will be fully briefed and argued to the Supreme Court. There will also certainly be multiple friend-of-the-court briefs filed on both sides. Assuming the Court acts to grant review in November, the argument date will likely be in March. In the normal course, the Supreme Court would issue its decision on whether or not Section 3 of DOMA is constitutional by the end of June 2013.

HOW ARE THESE CASES DIFFERENT FROM THE CHALLENGE TO PROP 8?

In the DOMA cases the plaintiffs are already married and are simply asking the Supreme Court to require that the federal government respect their marriages for purposes of all federal statutes and programs. In “freedom to marry” cases like the Prop 8 case, in contrast, the plaintiffs are not married and argue that the federal (or in some cases state) constitution requires the state to allow same-sex couples to marry. A win in one of the DOMA cases would mean that the federal government has to respect the existing marriages of same-sex couples, but would not force any new states to let same-sex couples marry. A win in the Prop 8 case would at a minimum require California to start allowing same-sex couples to marry again, and could affect either some other states or even all states that do not currently allow same-sex couples to marry. 

 

Stand up to defeat DOMA. Sign our pledge now!

 

Providing for Lambda Legal’s work in your estate plans is a wonderful way to create a lasting legacy. Resources no longer needed can be used in your name to make the world a better place for the next generation of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people. And until a cure is found, we’ll continue to secure the civil rights of people with HIV or AIDS.

The starting point for making a bequest to Lambda Legal is to make a valid will. To ensure that your will is valid and enforceable under the law of the state where you live, we strongly recommend that you consult with an attorney in making your will.

Please take note:  On June 26, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled the so-called Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) unconstitutional.  For information about how this development may potentially affect you, click here.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) recently clarified that binational same-sex couples should be recognized for purposes of delaying or suspending removal and deportation proceedings. In this fact sheet, Lambda Legal provides answers to frequently asked questions from binational same-sex couples about this new immigration development. Please note that this document is not intended to provide legal advice or guidance regarding any specific situation.

1. What’s new for binational same-sex couples?

In reviewing deportation cases, immigration officials consider a variety of factors to determine whether removal should be delayed or suspended. One of these factors is: “the person’s ties and contributions to the community, including family relationships.”

On September 27, 2012, DHS clarified that the definition of the phrase “family relationships,” includes “long-term, same-sex partners.” This is an important clarification, because immigration officials across the country were not consistently respecting same-sex couples in removal proceedings.

2. How does this new immigration development affect binational same-sex couples?

If you are an undocumented person who has already been placed in removal or deportation proceedings, your relationship to a U.S. citizen of the same sex may, in some instances, help delay or suspend your deportation. If you are already in removal proceedings and you are in a binational same-sex relationship, you should consult with an immigration lawyer to better understand your options.

3. Will every binational same-sex couple benefit from this new immigration development?

No. As with every other factor that immigration officials take under consideration in removal proceedings, the “family relationships” factor is applied on an individual, case-by-case basis to determine whether prosecutorial discretion is appropriate. If prosecutorial discretion is exercised, the deportation may be delayed or suspended.

4. Do any factors that immigration officials take under consideration help HIV-affected binational same-sex couples?

Yes. Your health or your partner’s health—including HIV status—may be relevant for purposes of delaying or suspending removal proceedings, because the factors that immigration officials take under consideration include:

  • whether the person is the primary caretaker of a person with a mental or physical disability, minor, or seriously ill relative; and
  • whether the person or the person’s spouse suffers from severe mental or physical illness.

5. What can I expect next?

DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano announced that she would direct U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement to issue written guidance to field offices codifying that LGBT family ties would be recognized as a positive factor for discretionary relief in immigration enforcement deportation cases.

6. With this new immigration announcement, can I get a green card or apply for residency if I marry my same-sex U.S. citizen partner?

No. It is important to know that you could be placing yourself at significant risk of deportation by applying for a green card or residency based on your marriage to a same-sex U.S. citizen partner. Undocumented persons who file an application for a green card or residency based on a marriage to a same-sex U.S. citizen run the risk of getting the application denied and being placed in removal proceedings. To avoid this risk, couples may want to wait, in hopes that the so-called Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) is struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court r repealed, or until immigration officials take an official position about granting immigration protection and benefits to married same-sex couples before applying for a green card or residency.

7. If DHS is not providing immigration protection, should binational same-sex couples get married?

Whether to get married is an intensely personal decision that only you can make for yourself. If you marry your same-sex partner, you will not receive the same immigration-related protections and benefits as a different-sex married couple as long as DOMA is still in effect. binational same-sex couples should be prepared for and willing to take additional considerations into account before deciding to marry because, under DOMA, immigration officials will not provide a green card or residency to an immigrant who marries a same-sex U.S. citizen partner. Marriage to a same-sex partner has numerous potential risks and consequences for an immigrant who wants to remain in the United States.

8. If I am an undocumented person, would it be easier for immigration officials to locate me or detect my immigration status if I get married?

No. In most places, including New York, you do not have to be a U.S. citizen to get married, and you do not have to provide proof of immigration status to obtain a marriage license. This means that immigration officials will not be able to discover your immigration status through your marriage. However, if you submit an application for a green card or residency based on your marriage to your same-sex partner, immigration officials will discover your undocumented status and likely place you in removal proceedings if your application for a green card or residency is denied.

9. How does marriage affect my visa to visit, live, or work in the United States?

If you have a visa to visit, live or work in the United States, getting married may make it more difficult to obtain or extend some visas. If immigration officials discover that you have an interest or incentive to remain in the United States, because you are married to a U.S. citizen, this may be a basis for denying a visa application, extension, or renewal. If you have a visa to visit, live, or work in the United States, and are interested in marrying your same-sex partner, you should consult an immigration attorney before you take this step, and find out how marriage may affect your immigration status.

10. What other resources are available for me?

Lambda Legal’s Help Desk staff responds directly to members of our communities who are seeking legal information and assistance with discrimination related to sexual orientation, gender identity and expression, and HIV status.

Esta temporada de graduaciones, millones de jóvenes de todas partes del país rentarán trajes de etiqueta o comprarán vestidos; se preocuparán acerca de a quién le deben invitar como su acompañante (o quién los invitará a ellos) y harán planes para la fiesta escolar más grande del año. Cada año, entre todos esos millones de jóvenes, un creciente grupo de valientes estudiantes lesbianas, gays, bisexuales, transgénero e inquisitivos (LGBTQ por sus siglas en inglés) que se rehúsan a ser excluidos de las festividades, ejercen su derecho de llevar un acompañante del mismo sexo al baile de graduación. Si estudias en una escuela pública y estás pensando en llevar un acompañante del mismo sexo al baile de graduación, a continuación hay algunos aspectos importantes para tomar en cuenta. Fíjate que ésto no constituye consulta jurídica. Si piensas que te están impidiendo que participes en tu baile de graduación o que has sido objeto de discriminación al llegar al evento, ponte en contacto con Lambda Legal o con un abogado local.

Ocho preguntas y respuestas sobre tus derechos en el baile de graduación

1. ¿Puedo llevar un acompañante del mismo sexo al baile de graduación?

Sí. Puedes llevar un acompañante del mismo sexo al baile de graduación.

Tu participación con un acompañante del mismo sexo tuyo está considerada una “actividad expresiva”; es decir, estás expresando tu identidad y comunicando a los otros que tú y tu acompañante tienen el mismo derecho que cualquiera otra pareja de asistir al evento y disfrutarlo. Hace más que 20 años, una corte federal reconoció que la Primera Enmienda protege esta expresión, cuando dictó que Aaron Fricke, estudiante del último año de la preparatoria, tenía el derecho de llevar a su acompañante varón al baile de graduación. La preocupación de la escuela de que los otros estudiantes pudieran reaccionar de manera negativa contra Aaron y su acompañante no justificaba prohibirle que asistiera al baile. Se solicitó a la escuela que tomara las medidas de seguridad adecuadas para garantizar la seguridad de todos los estudiantes durante el evento.

También tienes derecho a un tratamiento igualitario por parte de tu escuela. Algunas leyes estatales sobre la educación prohíben la discriminación por base del género o la orientación sexual; algunas leyes estatales antidiscriminatorias se aplican a escuelas; y el Título IX,una ley federal, prohíbe la discriminación por base del género en cualquier programa o actividad educativa que reciba apoyo financiero federal. Las garantías de protección igualitaria que están establecidas por las constituciones estatales y federales también prohíben la discriminación irracional basada en el género o la orientación sexual.

2. ¿Qué debo hacer si mi escuela me informa que no puedo llevar un acompañante del mismo sexo al baile de graduación y me rechaza de comprar boletos?

Primero, trata de obtener el apoyo de tu(s) padre(s) o guardian(es) legal(es). Pídele(s) que se comunique(n) con el director de la escuela por nombre tuyo y que la escuela explique por escrito los motivos de su decisión negativa con respecto a tu situación. Si la escuela sigue oponiéndote, comunícate con Lambda Legal o con un abogado local.

3. ¿Qué hago si el director dice que la escuela me permitirá llevar a mi acompañante, pero que primero ambos tenemos obtener el permiso de nuestros padres?

Las escuelas no deberían singularizarles, ni a otras parejas del mismo sexo para tratamiento diferente. No hay justificación legal para exigir que algunas parejas obtengan permiso debido a su género u orientación sexual. A menos que una escuela requiera el permiso de los padres de todas las parejas, no debería exigírselo a ustedes. Y en el caso de que la escuela posteriormente argumente que el permiso especial de sus padres de alguna forma se lo quita el deber de garantizarles la seguridad durante el evento, sus padres deben solicitar una explicación completa de las autoridades escolares.

4. ¿Cómo podemos garantizar que tendrémos la seguridad que debemos tener en el baile de graduación?

Las escuelas no pueden rehusar a proporcionarte la misma protección que proporcionan a todas las demás parejas. Si te preocupa por tu seguridad, necesitas hablar con el director de tu escuela o con el superintendente del distrito antes ir al baile de graduación. Debes tratar de darles tanta información como sea posible sobre lo que ha ocurrido o quién ha sido amenazado. En el caso del Aaron Fricke, la corte determinó que “es posible tomar medidas de seguridad importantes y la Primera Enmienda establece que se tomen dichas medidas a fin de proteger, en vez de acallar, la expresión libre.” No deberías resultar en sentirte molestado u hostigado por asistir a tu baile de graduación.

5. ¿Qué hago si somos dos lesbianas y ambas queremos llevarnos los esmoquines (tuxedos)? ¿Puede establecer reglas de vestuario la escuela, limitándonos a los estereotipos tradicionales de género?

Si bien las escuelas puedan establecer reglas de vestuario generales para el baile de graduación, como el atuendo formal, no deberían obligarte a vestirse de tal manera que se iguala tu género. Impedir que una estudiante mujer vista un esmoquin porque sólo es “apropriado” que los estudiantes varones visten así es discriminar por base del género, y la escuela podría ser objeto de una denuncia por la discriminación sexual, de acuerdo con las leyes estatales de la educación, las leyes antidiscriminatorias, y el Título IX de la Constitución de Estados Unidos. El derecho de expresar tu identidad de género por medio de ropas adecuadas también debería estar protegido por la Primera Enmienda o por una ley estatal similar. Pero hay que tomar en cuenta que las cortes a veces han determinado que la preocupación de la escuela por motivos de seguridad, de distracciónes o alborotos sean válidos, y han defendido las reglas de vestuario según el género. Así que debes luchar por el derecho de vestir de la moda que deseas –la que te ofrece mayor comodidad y expresa tu identidad–pero también deberías considerar alternativas. (Por ejemplo, si no ganes la batalla para vestirte como deseas, siempre puedes protestar contra las reglas de vestuario usando un esmoquin recortado de papel como ramillete o como brazalete.)

6. Aunque la escuela tome medidas para garantizar nuestra seguridad, ¿Qué podemos hacer si otros estudiantes (o cualquiera otra persona) nos hostigan en el baile de graduación?

Necesitas reportar cualquier incidente a los funcionarios, al personal de seguridad o a otros vigilantes/acompañatas del baile. Si crees que podría haber problemas, pide el apoyo de amigos y aliados para que abran la pista juntos contigo durante el primer baile, para romper el hielo. Ésto puede crear un ambiente divertido, agradable, y de apoyo seguro durante la velada.

7. Si llegamos al baile y los funcionarios o vigilantes de la escuela no nos dejan entrar, ¿Qué podemos hacer?

Pide hablar con la persona encargada del evento y trata de convencerlo. Déjale saber que tienes el derecho a asistir, que no causarás ningún problema y que seguirás las mismas reglas de conducta (nada de pelear, nada de tomar alcohol) aplicable a todas las demás parejas. Si antes la noche del baile de graduación sabes que podría haber acusaciones de este tipo, puedes tomar medidas para evitar que te rechacen al llegar a la puerta. Podrías decirle por delante al director que llevarás a un acompañante del mismo sexo. Si el director se lo oponga, entonces puedes defender tu derecho de asistir al baile y abordar cualquier problema de antemano. Una vez que el director está de acuerdo con la situación, pídele un recado indicando que puedes asistir con tu acompañante. Lleva la nota contigo la noche del baile, y a lo mejor, no necesitarás usarla.

8. Al llegar al baile, ¿Qué hago si alguien intenta a impedir que bailemos juntos?

Tienes el derecho de participar en el baile de graduación de la misma forma que las otras parejas. Si bien la escuela tenga reglas de conducta que se apliquen a todos, no puede establecer una regla especial de “no bailar” para ti y tu acompañante. Los mismos principios jurídicos que te permiten asistir con tu acompañante también te permiten participar totalmente e igualitariamente en las actividades y diversión de la velada. Si alguien trata pararte, pide hablar con la persona encargada e infórmale de tus derechos. Si puedes, lleva contigo una copia de estas preguntas y respuestas como respaldo.

Pages

Subscribe to RSS - Fact Sheet