MORE ON PHILA. BENEFITS: From Law.com

A lawyer for the city of Philadelphia told the Pennsylvania Supreme Court Tuesday that the purpose of the city's domestic partnership ordinances was not to create the equivalence of marriage for same-sex couples but to protect them from discrimination and provide benefits to registered "life partners" of city employees.

"There is no conflict between what the ordinance does and what the domestic code of Pennsylvania does," the attorney, Barbara W. Mather, told the justices.

The benefits and protections bestowed by the ordinances at issue are not provided uniquely to married people, "so we're not about equating life partnership to marriage," explained Mather, a partner at Pepper Hamilton. ...

The ordinances at issue were enacted in 1998 while Edward G. Rendell was mayor. They extend the equivalent of spousal benefits to the partners of lesbian and gay city employees who have registered as life partners with the Philadelphia Commission on Human Relations. To register, couples present documentation that they've lived together for at least six months and agree to be responsible for each other's "common welfare."

The city also said life partners would be exempt from the city tax on real estate transfers, and specifically protected "life partners" from discrimination by adding such a category under the provision of the Fair Practices Ordinance that protects individuals from discrimination based on "marital status." ...

Under Pennsylvania's domestic code, married people are entrusted with a slew of benefits and obligations -- alimony, joint tax returns, family tax exemptions -- that are not affected by the Philadelphia ordinances, Mather said. ...

Abrams, arguing for Devlin, emphasized how Philadelphia's ordinance differs from municipal ordinances in Denver, Chicago and other cities because life partnership status under the Philadelphia ordinance is not connected to a city employee's job.

more
posted by Eve at 3:50 PM | link

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home