How did gay marriage become legal? Civil unions in this state paved the way 25 years ago.
Gay marriage, once an unpopular concept nationwide, is widely accepted today. And more so in certain states like Vermont.
'People take for granted that same-sex couples can get married nowadays,' Bill Lippert, 75, one of Vermont's first openly gay lawmakers, told the Burlington Free Press, which is a part of the USA TODAY Network. 'You can reference your husband or wife casually now in conversation. But if you weren't around 25 years ago, there isn't always an appreciation for how hard we had to fight."
April 26 marked the 25th anniversary of civil unions – marriage for same-sex couples in all but name – becoming state law. Although civil unions were deeply controversial even among Vermonters at the time, they served as the first pivotal step toward full marriage equality, Lippert said.
In 2000, Vermont became the first place in the world to grant marriage-equivalent legal rights to same-sex couples. Domestic partnerships existed in some places, but those unions 'usually only granted a few legal rights,' Lippert said.
'The eyes of the whole country and world were focused on what Vermont was doing in 2000,' said Lippert, who helped craft the civil unions bill while serving on the house judiciary committee.
Three years later Massachusetts became the first state to legalize gay marriage, followed by Connecticut and Iowa in 2008. Vermont followed suit in 2009. Several more states legalized same-sex marriage before the U.S. Supreme Court finally made it nationwide law in 2015 through the Obergefell v. Hodges case.
'One can see the direct connection between what Vermont did in 2000 with civil unions to what followed in Massachusetts and eventually with Obergefell in 2015,' Lippert said.
Prior to the creation of civil unions, gay and lesbian couples lacked 'a thousand more rights' than married straight couples, Lippert said, no matter how long they had been together.
For instance, if one partner in a same-sex relationship was in hospital, the other partner did not automatically have the power of attorney.
'That was one of the most painful ones,' Lippert said.
Lippert recalled one particularly egregious case that happened to a lesbian couple with a child. When the partner who had given birth to the child died in a car crash, her parents fought for custody even though the two women had been raising the kid together.
'The list goes on and on,' Lippert said.
Although Vermont eventually established 'second parent adoption' in 1993, there still wasn't a 'legal connection between partners,' Lippert noted.
'That side of the triangle was missing,' he said.
In the late '90s, three lawyers and three same-sex couples decided it was time to test Vermont's marriage laws.
In 1998, three Vermont same-sex couples applied for marriage licenses in Chittenden County. When their marriages were denied, they filed a lawsuit that became known as Baker v. Vermont, or informally "the Baker Case," after the last name of one of the plaintiffs. A Vermont Superior Court judge ruled to dismiss the case, so the plaintiffs made an appeal to the Vermont Supreme Court.
What the Vermont Supreme Court did next shocked everyone. Instead of either legalizing gay marriage or striking down the case, the justices ruled in 1999 that same-sex couples should be afforded all the same legal rights as heterosexual couples but left it up to the Vermont legislature whether to grant gay couples the ability to marry or form an equivalent union.
'Personally, I was shocked because I had been assured by the attorneys fighting for gay marriage that we would never have to vote on it in the legislature,' Lippert said. 'Many of my colleagues were, frankly, beyond anxious – terrified – because they never wanted to deal with the issue because it was so controversial.'
At the time, some states were changing their constitutions to outlaw gay marriage. The Defense of Marriage Act also went into effect two years prior. In Vermont specifically, only 20% of residents supported gay marriage.
Gay marriage 'was not a popular proposal,' Lippert recalled. 'It was hotly condemned and fought against by major religious groups as an affront to their religious sacraments.' One of their main fears was that churches would be forced to marry gay couples.
The Vermont legislature was already in mid-session when the court dropped the issue of gay marriage in their laps. The House judicial committee, where Lippert served as vice chair, was tasked with writing the bill that would grant gay couples the right to marry or to form an equivalent union.
After listening to weeks of testimony from supporters and opponents of gay marriage, the committee voted to create a 'parallel legal structure,' which they named civil unions, Lippert said.
'It was very disappointing for the attorneys and advocates, but it was clear that we did not have the votes to create full marriage for same-sex couples,' said Lippert, who was among the three committee members to vote for gay marriage.
Some gay marriage advocates at the time found the idea of civil unions insulting and akin to the concept of 'Separate but equal.'
Some activists said civil unions were like 'having to sit on the back of the bus' and refused to support the bill, Lippert said. 'Others said, 'At least we're on the bus.''
The lawsuit plaintiffs and their attorneys decided 'it was better to pass something achievable than pass something that would fail and then get nothing,' Lippert said.
Elsewhere in the country: Naples Pride pleased with judge's ruling on drag show, 'a really big win'
On the day House reps were scheduled to vote, Lippert and his committee members weren't sure if they had enough support to pass civil unions. Some representatives wouldn't share their plans, while others kept saying they 'needed more information' before they could decide which way to vote.
For some representatives, a "yes" vote guaranteed they would lose their seats in either the primary or general elections later that year.
'Until the roll call, none of us knew we were going to win,' said Lippert. 'It would have taken a few votes to switch and we would have lost.'
After 12 hours of debate and testimony that day, the Vermont house voted 76-69 to pass the civil unions bill.
Lippert primarily attributed the win to 'courageous' gay Vermonters, loved ones and other advocates who shared personal stories throughout the bill process. Some gay people even came out publicly for the first time to throw their support behind the bill.
Lippert also thinks the 'hateful phone calls and letters' legislators received made them realize why civil unions were necessary.
'They saw why we needed this,' Lippert said. 'That if this is the level of prejudice and hatefulness that comes at me, what must it be like for gay people? The hate backfired.'
Once civil unions passed the house, it was much smoother sailing for gay advocates. The senate, which had a higher percentage of Democrats than the house, passed civil unions 19-11.
Gov. Howard Dean, who already voiced his approval of civil unions, signed the bill into law soon after – albeit behind closed doors and without fanfare.
'He said publicly that marriage for same-sex couples made him uncomfortable' but that he could back civil unions, Lippert remembered. Even still, Dean's support was 'crucial.'
'If he hadn't been willing to say he would sign the bill, I don't think we would have passed it,' Lippert said. 'People wouldn't have risked voting for it.'
'Art is a form of protest': How Phoenix LGBTQ+ artists use poetry as an act of resistance
Later that year, 17 legislators who voted for civil unions in April 2000 lost their seats to opponents who promised to help repeal the institution. Dean, who had to wear a bulletproof vest during his gubernatorial campaign, also faced an ardent anti-civil unions challenger.
'It's hard to explain the level of controversy and some of the hatefulness directed at the governor and lawmakers,' Lippert said.
The following session, the now more conservative House managed to repeal civil unions by one vote, but the effort died in the Senate.
Between 2000 and 2009, thousands of gay couples from other states and nations traveled to Vermont to enter civil unions. They wanted legal recognition of their relationship somewhere even if their home state or country wouldn't respect it, Lippert said.
'At the time, I would have been happy to have settled the case in court,' Lippert said. 'But looking back, I think it would have garnered greater backlash if the court had granted gay marriage or an equivalent institution directly.'
That's what happened in Hawaii. In 1996, the Hawaiian Supreme Court ruled that it was unconstitutional to deny marriage to same-sex couples. An enormous public backlash ensued, and by 1998, Hawaiians had changed their state constitution to outlaw gay marriage.
Amending Vermont's constitution wouldn't have been as easy – it takes multiple years versus only one in Hawaii – but there definitely were some lawmakers who wanted to, Lippert said. Such an amendment never got off the ground, however.
'My view is civil unions was a historic step for civil marriage for same-sex couples,' Lippert said. 'Saying that full marriage equality was important does not take away from civil unions moving us to marriage equality in a profound way.'
Lippert and his spouse eventually entered a civil union themselves. They then got married once Vermont legalized what Lippert now calls 'full marriage equality.'
This article originally appeared on Burlington Free Press: Vermont civil unions paved way for US gay marriage equality
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hamilton Spectator
2 hours ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Clerk who denied same-sex marriage licenses in 2015 is still fighting Supreme Court's ruling
The Kentucky county clerk who became known around the world for her opposition to the U.S. Supreme Court's 2015 ruling that legalized same-sex marriage is still arguing in court that it should be overturned. Kim Davis became a cultural lightning rod 10 years ago, bringing national media and conservative religious leaders to eastern Kentucky as she continued for weeks to deny the licenses . She later met Pope Francis in Rome and was parodied on 'Saturday Night Live.' Kim Davis denied marriage licenses to same-sex couples Davis began denying marriage licenses to same-sex couples after the Supreme Court's landmark ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges on June 26, 2015. Videos of a same-sex couple arguing with Davis in the clerk's office over their denial of a license drew national attention to her office. She defied court orders to issue the licenses until a federal judge jailed her for contempt of court in September 2015. Davis was released after her staff issued the licenses on her behalf but removed her name from the form. The Kentucky Legislature later enacted a law removing the names of all county clerks from state marriage licenses. Davis cited her Christian faith Davis said her faith forbade her from what she saw as an endorsement of same-sex marriage. Faith leaders and conservative political leaders including former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee and then-Kentucky Gov. Matt Bevin rallied to her cause. After her release from jail , Davis addressed the media, saying that issuing same-sex marriage licenses 'would be conflicting with God's definition of marriage as a union between one man and one woman. This would be an act of disobedience to my God.' Davis declined a request for an interview from The Associated Press for this story. A man who was denied a license ran for her office In 2018, one of the men who had confronted Davis over her defiance ran for her office. David Ermold said he believed people in Rowan County were sick of Davis and wanted to move on. When he went to file his papers for the Democratic primary, Davis, a Republican, was there in her capacity as clerk to sign him up. Sitting across a desk from each other, the cordial meeting contrasted the first time they met three years earlier. Both candidates lost ; Ermold in the primary and Davis in the general election. She has not returned to politics. 10 years later, Davis wants the Supreme Court to reconsider same-sex marriage Davis' lawyers are attempting again to get her case before the Supreme Court, after the high court declined to hear an appeal from her in 2020. A federal judge has ordered Davis to pay a total of $360,000 in damages and attorney fees to Ermold and his partner. Davis lost a bid in March to have her appeal of that ruling heard by a federal appeals court, but she will appeal again to the Supreme Court. Her attorney, Mat Staver of the Liberty Counsel, said the goal is affirm Davis' constitutional rights and 'overturn Obergefell.' Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
Associated Press
2 hours ago
- Associated Press
Clerk who denied same-sex marriage licenses in 2015 is still fighting Supreme Court's ruling
The Kentucky county clerk who became known around the world for her opposition to the U.S. Supreme Court's 2015 ruling that legalized same-sex marriage is still arguing in court that it should be overturned. Kim Davis became a cultural lightning rod 10 years ago, bringing national media and conservative religious leaders to eastern Kentucky as she continued for weeks to deny the licenses. She later met Pope Francis in Rome and was parodied on 'Saturday Night Live.' Kim Davis denied marriage licenses to same-sex couples Davis began denying marriage licenses to same-sex couples after the Supreme Court's landmark ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges on June 26, 2015. Videos of a same-sex couple arguing with Davis in the clerk's office over their denial of a license drew national attention to her office. She defied court orders to issue the licenses until a federal judge jailed her for contempt of court in September 2015. Davis was released after her staff issued the licenses on her behalf but removed her name from the form. The Kentucky Legislature later enacted a law removing the names of all county clerks from state marriage licenses. Davis cited her Christian faith Davis said her faith forbade her from what she saw as an endorsement of same-sex marriage. Faith leaders and conservative political leaders including former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee and then-Kentucky Gov. Matt Bevin rallied to her cause. After her release from jail, Davis addressed the media, saying that issuing same-sex marriage licenses 'would be conflicting with God's definition of marriage as a union between one man and one woman. This would be an act of disobedience to my God.' Davis declined a request for an interview from The Associated Press for this story. A man who was denied a license ran for her officeIn 2018, one of the men who had confronted Davis over her defiance ran for her office. David Ermold said he believed people in Rowan County were sick of Davis and wanted to move on. When he went to file his papers for the Democratic primary, Davis, a Republican, was there in her capacity as clerk to sign him up. Sitting across a desk from each other, the cordial meeting contrasted the first time they met three years earlier. Both candidates lost; Ermold in the primary and Davis in the general election. She has not returned to politics. 10 years later, Davis wants the Supreme Court to reconsider same-sex marriageDavis' lawyers are attempting again to get her case before the Supreme Court, after the high court declined to hear an appeal from her in 2020. A federal judge has ordered Davis to pay a total of $360,000 in damages and attorney fees to Ermold and his partner. Davis lost a bid in March to have her appeal of that ruling heard by a federal appeals court, but she will appeal again to the Supreme Court. Her attorney, Mat Staver of the Liberty Counsel, said the goal is affirm Davis' constitutional rights and 'overturn Obergefell.'
11 hours ago
What to know about the Supreme Court ruling 10 years ago that legalized same-sex marriage in the US
COLUMBUS, Ohio -- A landmark U.S. Supreme Court ruling 10 years ago this month, on June 26, 2015, legalized same-sex marriage across the U.S. The Obergefell v. Hodges decision followed years of national wrangling over the issue, during which some states moved to protect domestic partnerships or civil unions for same-sex partners and others declared marriage could exist only between one man and one woman. In plaintiff James Obergefell's home state of Ohio, voters had overwhelmingly approved such an amendment in 2004 — effectively mirroring the federal Defense of Marriage Act, which denied federal recognition of same-sex couples. That laid the political groundwork for the legal challenge that bears his name. Here's what you need to know about the lawsuit, the people involved and the 2015 ruling's immediate and longer term effects: Obergefell and John Arthur, who brought the initial legal action, were long-time partners living in Cincinnati. They had been together for nearly two decades when Arthur was diagnosed with ALS, or amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, in 2011. Obergefell became Arthur's caregiver as the incurable condition ravaged his health over time. When in 2013 the Supreme Court struck down the federal Defense of Marriage Act, which had denied federal recognition of same-sex marriages, the pair acted quickly to get married. Their union was not allowed in Ohio, so they boarded a plane to Maryland and, because of Arthur's fragile health, married on the tarmac. It was when they learned their union would not be listed on Arthur's death certificate that the legal battle began. They went to court seeking recognition of their marriage on the document and their request was granted by a court. Ohio appealed and the case began its way up the ladder to the nation's high court. A Democrat, Obergefell made an unsuccessful run for the Ohio House in 2022. Rick Hodges, a Republican, was director of the Ohio Department of Health from August 2014 to 2017. The department handles death certificates in the state. Before being appointed by then-Gov. John Kasich, Hodges served five years in the Ohio House. Acquainted through the court case, he and Obergefell have become friends. The lawsuit eventually titled Obergefell v. Hodges argued that marriage is guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution's Fourteenth Amendment, specifically the due process and equal protection clauses. The litigation consolidated several lawsuits brought by same-sex couples in Ohio, Kentucky, Michigan and Tennessee who had been denied marriage licenses or recognition for their out-of-state marriages and whose cases had resulted in conflicting opinions in federal circuit courts. In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court ruled the right to marry is fundamental, calling it 'inherent in the liberty of the person,' and therefore protected by the Constitution. The ruling effectively nullified state-level bans on same-sex marriages, as well as laws declining to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other jurisdictions. The custody, property, tax, insurance and business implications of of the decision have also had sweeping impacts on other areas of law. Same-sex marriages surged in the immediate wake of the Obergefell decision, as dating couples and those already living as domestic partners flocked to courthouses and those houses of worship that welcomed them to legalize their unions. Over the ensuing decade, the number of married same-sex couples has more than doubled to an estimated 823,000, according to June data compiled by the Williams Institute at the University of California Los Angeles School of Law. Not all Americans supported the change. Standing as a national symbol of opponents was Kim Davis, a then-clerk in Rowan County, Kentucky, who refused to issue marriage licenses on religious grounds. She was briefly jailed, touching off weeks of protests as gay marriage foes around the country praised her defiance. Davis, a Republican, lost her bid for reelection in 2018. She was ordered to pay thousands in attorney fees incurred by a couple unable to get a license from her office. She has appealed in July 2024 in a challenge that seeks to overturn Obergefell. As he reflects of the decision's 10th anniversary, Obergefell has worried aloud about the state of LGBTQ+ rights in the country and the possibility that a case could reach the Supreme Court that might overturn the decision bearing his name. Eight states have introduced resolutions this year urging a reversal and the Southern Baptist Convention voted overwhelmingly at its meeting in Dallas earlier this month in favor of banning gay marriage and seeing the Obergefell decision overturned. Meanwhile, more than a dozen states have moved to strengthen legal protections for same-sex married couples in case Obergefell is ever overturned. In 2025, about 7 in 10 Americans — 68% — said marriages between same-sex couples should be recognized by the law as valid, up from 60% in May 2015.
