Legal Opinion

Alaska Civil Liberties Union v. State

Alaska Supreme Court

Decided October 28, 2005No. S-10459PublishedCited by 41 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

EASTAUGH, Justice.

I. INTRODUCTION

The State of Alaska and the Municipality of Anchorage offer valuable benefits to their employees’ spouses that they do not offer to then' unmarried employees’ domestic partners. Essentially all opposite-sex adult couples may marry and thus become eligible for these benefits. But no same-sex couple can ever become eligible for these benefits because same-sex couples may not marry in Alaska. 1 The spousal limitations in the benefits programs therefore affect public employees with same-sex domestic partners differently than public employees who are…

2Cases cited49 opinions

  1. Meyer v. NebraskaSupreme Court of the United States · 1923
  2. Boddie v. ConnecticutSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  3. Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. CaseySupreme Court of the United States · 1992
  4. Personnel Administrator of Mass. v. FeeneySupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  5. Loving v. VirginiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967

44 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by41 opinions

  1. Doe v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 2008
  2. Procito v. Unemployment Compensation Board of ReviewCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2008
  3. Gefre v. Davis Wright Tremaine, LLPAlaska Supreme Court · 2013
  4. State v. SchmidtAlaska Supreme Court · 2014
  5. Planned Parenthood of the Great Northwest v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 2016

36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API