A judge in Wisconsin ruled yesterday that domestic partnerships are not substantially similar to marriages, thus meaning the partnerships do not violate the state’s 2006 constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.
Judge Daniel Moeser made it clear that domestic partnerships don’t come close:
The state does not recognize domestic partnership in a way that even remotely resembles how the state recognizes marriage. Moreover, domestic partners have far fewer legal rights, duties, and liabilities in comparison to the legal rights, duties, and liabilities of spouses.
Wisconsin’s domestic partnerships allow same-sex couples to visit each other in hospitals, make end-of-life decisions, and inherit each other’s property. The partnerships do not guarantee any ability to share benefits, and same-sex couples still don’t have the right to adopt.