Friday, November 14, 2003
Nebraska bans partnerships?
The challenged Nebraska constitutional provision,
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, domstic partnership, or other similar same-sex relationship shall not be valid or recognized in Nebraska.
Most states recognize sole proprietorships, partnerships, and corporations as the usual forms of business organization. Many people own their domiciles as sole proprietorships. I am unclear whether owning a domicle as tentants in common or as joint tenants creates a domestic partnership. In the gay marriage discussion, I often ask, well, what is it they want to do that they can't do with a well-drafted partnership agreement?
But partnership agreements are a good idea for lots of people, especially those who share housing - banning domestic partnerships goes way beyond gay couples. Sure, we know it's a buzzword. But they put it in the state constitution, which requires fairly literal construction. There may be serious full faith and credit clause issues here. I suppose the "uniting of two persons" phrase could be construed to mean that they don't really mean partnerships after all. Haven't read the opinon, which was based on a losing bill of attainder argument by plaintiffs.
The challenged Nebraska constitutional provision,
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, domstic partnership, or other similar same-sex relationship shall not be valid or recognized in Nebraska.
Most states recognize sole proprietorships, partnerships, and corporations as the usual forms of business organization. Many people own their domiciles as sole proprietorships. I am unclear whether owning a domicle as tentants in common or as joint tenants creates a domestic partnership. In the gay marriage discussion, I often ask, well, what is it they want to do that they can't do with a well-drafted partnership agreement?
But partnership agreements are a good idea for lots of people, especially those who share housing - banning domestic partnerships goes way beyond gay couples. Sure, we know it's a buzzword. But they put it in the state constitution, which requires fairly literal construction. There may be serious full faith and credit clause issues here. I suppose the "uniting of two persons" phrase could be construed to mean that they don't really mean partnerships after all. Haven't read the opinon, which was based on a losing bill of attainder argument by plaintiffs.
Comments:
Post a Comment
