News

Pennsylvania Court Strikes Down Philly
"Life Partnerships"
— August 30, 2002

Thursday, a unanimous 7-judge panel of the Pennsylvania Court of Appeals struck down the City of Philadelphia's "life partnership" system. In a strongly worded opinion, the court held that by creating "life partnerships" as a new "marital status, the City of Philadelphia had acted outside its municipal authority and unconstitutionally meddled in state domestic relations law.

The case arouse after the City of Philadelphia adopted three "life partnership" ordinances in 1998. With these three ordinances, the City had created a new status of "life partner," extended spousal benefits to "life partners" of city employees, declared that status to be within the definition of "marital status" discrimination, and prohibited private employers and places of public accommodation in the city from discriminating on the basis of such marital relationships. In addition, the ordinances had extended to "life partners" the spousal exemption from real estate transfer tax and also amended the city's pension program to reflect the city's decision to deemphasize the legal significance of marriage.

While the city argued that the "life partnership" system was merely a matter of local regulation, the court had little patience for the argument, declaring, "Obviously, the City attempted to circumvent the Marriage Law when it specifically categorized the Life Partner reliationship between a same-sex couple as a type of marital status. While the City would have us believe that '[t]he ordinances do not . . . legislate with respect to relationships at all,' this reasoning is utterly facile." Reviewing the list of requirements for entry into a "life partnership," the court noted striking similarities with the marriage statute, including capacity to contract, prohibition against blood relationships, limitation to one partner, and a commitment of mutual support.

In explaining its decision, the court held that Philadelphia status of "'Life Partnership' creates a new, and unique, domestic relationship and, therefore, clearly violates public policy, which public policy has been clearly and forcefully articulated by the Legislature of this Commonwealth." After noting that the Pennsylvania defense of marriage statute had been adopted by overwhelming majorities in 1996, the court concluded, "Nothing could be more clear, therefore, than that the City of Philadelphia's category of a marital relationship does indeed violate the abundantly clear public policy of this state."

In news reports Friday, Philadelphia Mayor John Street's office had no comment on the case or indication of plans to appeal. Mayor Street, then City Council President, opposed the ordinances at the time of their adoption in 1998.

Sources: Devlin v. City of Philadelphia, No. 2568 C.D. 2000 (Pa. Ct. App. August 29, 2002); Ovetta Wiggins and Thomas Fitzgerald, "Same-Sex Benefits in Phila. Overruled," Philadelphia Inquirer, August 30, 2002, at A01.