Legal Rep Referencing Federal DOMA in Interstate Same-Sex Civil Union Custody Controversy
by Mary Rettig
September 7, 2005
(AgapePress) - The chief counsel for Florida-based Liberty Counsel says oral arguments in an important child custody case will be presented before the Vermont Supreme Court today. The case involves Lisa Miller, a former lesbian who traveled to Vermont to obtain a civil union with her partner while they were living in Virginia. Miller later gave birth to a child through artificial insemination.
The couple later broke up, and now Miller's former partner, Janet Jenkins, is demanding visitation rights to the child. Vermont law recognizes Jenkins parental rights while Virginia law does not. But Miller, now a Christian, has not allowed Jenkins to see the child and Vermont courts have found her in contempt.
Liberty Counsel's Erik Stanley, who represents Miller, says the legal team is appealing the Vermont decision and will refer to the Federal Defense of Marriage Act in their arguments.
"We're hopeful that they will apply the federal DOMA to not require Virginia to accept their laws," he says. "Virginia's already said they're not going to. So, really, what you have is this family -- Lisa and her daughter -- that are caught in the middle of a tug-of-war between these two states."
Stanley says Liberty Counsel will be arguing before the Vermont Supreme Court today against Miller's contempt conviction and will also be trying to sort out the two jurisdiction's conflicting court rulings. "Virginia does not recognize civil unions," he explains, "so the Virginia court has said that Janet is not a parent of the child, has no parental rights, and no visitation rights to the child."
On the other hand, the attorney notes, "Vermont, applying its civil unions laws, has said that Janet is a parent of the child and has to have custody and visitation. And when Lisa refused that, Vermont courts held her in contempt of court." Miller v. Jenkins is unique in that it represents the first time the courts of two states have issued conflicting decisions over the same same-sex union case. It is also the first case in the U.S. courts to involve dueling federal laws.
Stanley is not counting on a resolution at this level of the case. If the two states continue to conflict following their decisions later this year, the lawyer says, the parties will have to go before the Supreme Court of the United States for a final word on the matter.
Commenting on Miller v. Jenkins, Liberty Counsel president Mathew D. Staver observes, "It is a mistake to conclude that one state's experiment with same-sex unions will not affect another state." Same-sex marriage and civil union laws will "collide with the marriage laws of other states to create conflict, cause havoc and weave a tangled web," he contends; and ultimately, he adds, "Children will be caught in the middle of this conflict."
President Bush and the U.S. Congress need to act now, Staver says, to amend the Constitution of the United States to preserve marriage as one man and one woman. He says George W. Bush should move forward with the marriage mandate that propelled him into office.
While Social Security reform may be needed, the Liberty Counsel spokesman adds, Social Security was not Bush's mandate. Real social security begins, Staver asserts, by protecting marriage and the family.
Mary Rettig, a regular contributor to AgapePress, is a reporter for American Family Radio News, which can be heard online.
