Van Hollen says he won't defend state's domestic partnerships

Van Hollen says he won't defend state's domestic partnerships

Madison — Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen said Friday he would not defend the state in a lawsuit over the state's new domestic partner law.

Supporters of Wisconsin's ban on same-sex marriage and civil unions last month asked the state Supreme Court to declare a system of recognizing domestic partnerships unconstitutional. Couples started applying for declarations of domestic partnerships this month under the provision that was part of the budget Gov. Jim Doyle signed in July.

Van Hollen, a Republican who has not ruled out a run for governor in 2010, said his decision wasn't based on a policy disagreement, but was rooted in his responsibility to uphold the state's constitution.

The state budget provision recognizes a legal status that is substantially similar to the legal status of marriage, Van Hollen's statement said, and defending the law would require him to ignore the voters' approval of the marriage amendment in 2006.

http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/53957072.html

nevermind. Republicans suck.

to the fundie/homophobe sing-song that they "only object to the word 'marriage'". Disgusting. It's time the community realises that there is NO appeasing these dweebs. Looks like they think the Constitution (either state or federal) was written only for them.

It now makes me understand why many want to use "gay marriage" instead of "civil union" or "partnership" (in the UK, I've noted their media frequently using "partner" for hetero couples too, but I digress.) I still prefer "partner", but it makes more sense.

You don't get to decide on a whim what laws you do and don't enforce.

Not sure how the state's constitution might differ from the US constitution, but the US Justice Department has declined to defend existing laws dozens of times under many different administrations.

what it's called, because it infringes somehow on marriage? :wtf:

This really shows that the republicans were lying through their teeth when they said they'd support partnerships as long as they weren't called marriages. They pushed us back the equality we were seeking to domestic partnerships, and then they'll push us From domestic partnerships back into the closet if they are able. :grr:

I bet big wigs in the GOP will be congratulating him for sticking the state with the bill while he does this too. Bankrupt Government! Drain the budget so that essential services have to get cut or canceled. Isn't that what they're all about? This asshole gets to kill to birds with one stone.

It's a news story, it's not derogatory to anyone but points out Republican hypocrisy and yet some people have decided it's "unrec" worthy.

Just don't get it.

I don't understand the unrecs either.

I don't understand how this motherfucker managed to squeak past the wonderful Kathleen Falk in the last Attorney General's race. I guess it reminds me why I hated living there so much -- dumpy, unintelligent voters.

This is indeed a tricky one though.