Legal Opinion
National Pride at Work, Inc v. Governor
Michigan Supreme Court
Decided May 7, 2008No. Docket 133429, 133554PublishedCited by 38 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtMarkman, J.
We granted leave to appeal to consider whether the marriage amendment, Const 1963, art 1, § 25, which states that “the union of one man and one woman in marriage shall be the only agreement recognized as a marriage or similar union for any purpose,” prohibits public employers from providing health-insurance benefits to their employees’ qualified same-sex domestic partners. Because we agree with the Court of Appeals that providing such benefits does violate the marriage amendment, we affirm its judgment.
I. FACTS AND HISTORY
The marriage amendment, Const 1963, art 1, § 25, was approved by a…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Jacobson v. MassachusettsSupreme Court of the United States · 1905
- Parker v. District of ColumbiaCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2007
- United States v. EmersonCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2001
- Mayor of Lansing v. Public Service CommissionMichigan Supreme Court · 2004
- Baker v. StateSupreme Court of Vermont · 1999
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by38 opinions
- Robinson v. City of LansingMichigan Supreme Court · 2010
- Aft Michigan v. State of MichiganMichigan Supreme Court · 2015
- Catherine Puetz Md v. Spectrum Health HospitalsMichigan Court of Appeals · 2018
- Citizens Protecting Michigan's Constitution v. Secretary of StateMichigan Court of Appeals · 2008
- AFSCME Council 25 v. State Employees' Retirement SystemMichigan Court of Appeals · 2011
33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.