Skip to main content icon/video/no-internet

A civil union is a legally and socially recognized union between partners of the same sex. As a socio-legal institution, civil unions were created to provide same-sex couples with many of the rights, benefits, and privileges typically associated with opposite-sex civil marriage. Civil unions are distinguished by the fact that they provide all of the state-recognized rights and benefits of marriage, without being the equivalent of marriage.

The term civil union was first adopted in the American context and, therefore, has a unique cultural, political, and historical trajectory. Given their particular development, it is important to distinguish civil unions from American-style domestic partnerships, European-style registered partnerships, and civil marriage.

Throughout the 1990s, but especially after the Hawaii Supreme Court's decision in Baehr v. Lewin (1993), relationship recognition for same-sex couples became a major topic of political debate. Various municipalities across the country began creating domestic partnership registries, providing a basic legal structure for the official recognition of same-sex relationships. The rights and benefits available through these domestic partnerships vary significantly, but typically involve the ability to visit one's partner in a hospital, and various contractual agreements regarding property ownership and mutual support. While domestic partnerships provide a set of basic rights to same-sex couples, they have often been criticized for providing only minimal protections, and this criticism represented the early stages of the movement for same-sex marriage.

Court Battles and Decisions

In 1999, three same-sex couples sued the state of Vermont for the right to marry. In a landmark decision called Baker v. State, the Vermont Supreme Court ruled unanimously that denying the statutory benefits and protections of marriage to same-sex couples violated the Common Benefits Clause of the Vermont Constitution. In an opinion authored by Chief Justice Amestoy, the court held that the state was “constitutionally required to extend to same-sex couples the common benefits and protections that flow from marriage under Vermont law.” However, the court left it to the Vermont legislature to remedy the violation by either incorporating same-sex couples into existing marriage laws, or by creating a statutory alternative that provided same-sex couples the full “benefit, protection, and security of the law.”

The court's decision proved controversial and the Vermont legislature engaged in extensive committee hearings and public debate to find a legally acceptable solution. Once it became clear that the majority of legislators preferred the creation of an alternative statutory arrangement, rather than the integration of same-sex couples into civil marriage, much of the discussion focused on what such an arrangement should be called. Members of the Vermont legislature considered several terms including domestic partnership, civil accord, and civil domestic partnership; however, members of the gay and lesbian community were dissatisfied with the term domestic partnership as were many of the legislators. Legal scholar William Eskridge notes that the term civil union first became part of the Vermont legislative record when Representative Cathy Voyer urged that the provision of equal benefits and responsibilities ought to be made in a “civil union package.” The term civil union gained the favor of Representative Thomas Little, the chair of Vermont's House Judiciary Committee, and the term was eventually adopted by the full legislature when it passed Act 91-An Act Relating to Civil Unions.

...

  • Loading...
locked icon

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL

  • Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life
  • Read modern, diverse business cases
  • Explore hundreds of books and reference titles

Sage Recommends

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Loading