Landmark Legislation in Vermont Raises Questions for Other States.

Vermont now recognizes "civil unions" between same-sex couples, granting them virtually all the benefits, protections and responsibilities that are given to married couples.

But this new law may have implications outside the state's border, as same-sex couples from other states seek recognition of their relationships.

The Vermont legislation came out of a December 1999 state Supreme Court ruling that same-sex couples were entitled, under the state constitution's common benefits clause, to the same benefits and protections as married opposite-sex couples. The court ruled that the Vermont General Assembly had to decide how to provide these benefits and protections, either by legalizing marriage for same-sex couples or by establishing an alternative system.

The Vermont legislature chose to preserve marriage as the "legally recognized union of one man and one woman," but at the same time create a parallel system for same-sex couples that goes beyond existing "domestic partnership" and "reciprocal beneficiaries" laws that exist in California, Hawaii and many localities in the United States today.

In an extraordinary and intense session, the legislature held what Governor Howard Dean called the most "prolonged and intense period of public debate" in the state's history. Thousands of Vermonters attended hearings at the Capitol and at various sites throughout the state through interactive public access television. Citizens attended town meetings and held a straw vote on the issue--with most towns opposing same-sex marriages and domestic partnership benefits. Other polls, however, indicated sentiments much closer to a 50-50 split. The issue generated 10 to 20 times the number of letters, e-mail messages and telephone calls legislators normally receive.

The Vermont system of civil unions entitles same-sex couples to benefits and responsibilities related to state taxes, medical decision making, probate, property ownership and other laws that apply to married couples. Civil union couples would be responsible for the support of their partners and would have to undergo a formal "dissolution of civil union" to end the relationship.

However, the law does not require private employers to provide health insurance coverage for civil union couples, since doing so would subject it to challenges based on the federal Employee Retirement and Income Security Act.

The law is likely to lead same-sex couples who are granted a civil union in Vermont to press for recognition of their relationships in other states. Under the full faith and credit clause of the U.S. Constitution, states are generally required to recognize and honor the public laws of other states, unless those laws are contrary to the public policy of that state. Traditionally, states have recognized marriages solemnized in other states.

Recognizing the possibility of a state legalizing same-sex marriage, Congress in 1996 passed the Defense of Marriage Act. The act bars federal recognition of same-sex marriages and also allows states to do the same. Since 1995, 34 states have prohibited same-sex marriages or the recognition of same-sex marriages formed in other jurisdictions. However, gay rights groups are questioning the constitutionality of the act and state prohibitions. Civil union couples from other states who are granted a civil union in Vermont could demand that their relationships be recognized by their home state. Despite the actions of Congress, state legislatures and Vermont, the only certainty is that the matter will once again end up in court.