A U.S. Army soldier from 3/1 AD Task Force Bulldog uses his night vision equipment before an early morning joint patrol with Afghan National Army (ANA) soldiers in a village in Kherwar district in Logar province, eastern Afghanistan, May 22, 2012. REUTERS/Danish Siddiqui

Reuters Photojournalism

Our day's top images, in-depth photo essays and offbeat slices of life. See the best of Reuters photography.  See more | Photo caption 

Photo

Maxim Hot 100

The world's most beautiful women as chosen by Maxim readers.  Slideshow 

A cross is seen in Joplin, Missouri May 17, 2012. May 22 marks the one year anniversary of a deadly EF-5 tornado that ripped through the town, killing 161 people. The tornado damaged or destroyed about 7,500 homes and 500 other buildings, but the city is now well into a recovery mode that has spurred some segments of the local economy. REUTERS/Eric Thayer (UNITED STATES - Tags: DISASTER ENVIRONMENT RELIGION)

Joplin, one year after

May 22 marks the one year anniversary of a deadly tornado that ripped through Joplin, Missouri, killing 161 people.  Slideshow 

Appeals court upholds same-sex benefits in Arizona

Related Topics

PHOENIX | Tue Sep 6, 2011 8:33pm EDT

PHOENIX (Reuters) - A federal appeals court ruled on Tuesday that Arizona must continue for now to provide health care benefits to same-sex partners of state government workers.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco upheld a temporary block on a controversial 2009 state law that sought to strip health coverage for gay and lesbian domestic partners of Arizona employees.

In a 13-page opinion, the three-member appeals panel said such a law would go against the long-standing constitutional right to equal protection.

A New York-based legal advocacy group hailed the ruling as a major victory for same sex couples.

"Today's decision ... means Arizona's lesbian and gay state employees will not suddenly find themselves without vital family health coverage," said Tara Borelli, a Lambda Legal attorney who argued the case before the court.

The group represented seven of the nine state workers who filed suit against the law in November 2009, two months after Governor Jan Brewer signed the bill. The bill was part of drastic cuts made to balance the state's budget.

The state employees claimed in the suit that the law violated their due process and equal protection rights and won a temporary stay from a federal court until it could decide on the suit.

It was not until 2008 that same-sex partners were eligible for the same health coverage as their opposite sex partners in Arizona. Former Governor Janet Napolitano granted these individuals the benefits through an executive order.

Brewer spokesman Matt Benson said the appeals court opinion "flies in the face of logic and the law" and grants more benefits to same-sex partners than straight couples.

"In the governor's opinion, this is a step in the wrong direction," he said.

Benson said the governor is studying the ruling and has not yet made a decision on an appeal.

(Editing by Tim Gaynor and Jerry Norton)

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (4)
ldfrmc wrote:
‘Brewer spokesman Matt Benson said the appeals court opinion “flies in the face of logic and the law” and grants more benefits to same-sex partners than straight couples.’

More benefits? Such as. . . what? No one at a press conference asked him?!

Sep 06, 2011 9:46pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
dualcitizen wrote:
“Today’s decision … means Arizona’s lesbian and gay state employees will not suddenly find themselves without vital family health coverage,” Family? They aren’t family, my live in girlfriend couldn’t get benefits, this is BS, they don’t deserve benefits.

Sep 06, 2011 10:15pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Riker89 wrote:
dualcitizen, you have the option of marrying your live-in girlfriend. Gays don’t have that option. We’re talking about equal rights, not special rights. Domestic partnership benefits are a way of extending at least a little bit of equal protection under the law.

Sep 06, 2011 12:16am EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.