U.S. Supreme Court should uphold Ariz. marriage benefitsAlliance Defending Freedom files brief on behalf of Center for Arizona Policy
Monday, August 06, 2012
Attorney sound bite: Jim Campbell
“Society should protect and strengthen marriage, not undermine it, as this lawsuit against Arizona’s marriage benefits seeks to do. No state should be forced to offer marital benefits to unmarried couples,” said Alliance Defending Freedom Litigation Staff Counsel Jim Campbell. “The lifelong, faithful union of a man and a woman is the foundation of society. That’s why the government provides unique benefits to married couples.”
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit concluded on September 6, 2011, that Arizona’s law, which affords benefits to married spouses of state employees but not to unmarried partners of those employees, is unconstitutional.
The friend-of-the-court brief filed Friday in support of the state law in Brewer v. Diaz explains that the 9th Circuit erroneously concluded that the law unconstitutionally discriminates against same-sex couples. The brief points out that the law applies to any unmarried partner of a state employee, regardless of whether they are in same-sex or opposite-sex relationships, and that the 9th Circuit assumed an ill intent on the part of the legislature and the people of Arizona that does not exist.
The 9th Circuit has wrongfully condemned the people of Arizona as irrational for desiring to promote and protect marriage by law,” said Alliance Defending Freedom Senior Counsel Byron Babione. “In making this error, the 9th Circuit has placed the benefits and marriage laws of many other states in jeopardy.”