US law trumps state on gay rights

[Ian David]

In one of the first cases to test Washington's landmark gay-rights law, state officials said Friday that they had no jurisdiction in a dispute over access to health care because federal law supersedes the state statute. Gay-rights advocates, who had been watching the case closely, said the state's decision was not a setback and will have little impact on future cases.

Last year, after a nearly 30-year effort, lawmakers passed a bill to ban discrimination in employment, housing and lending on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity.

In August, a heterosexual woman named Sandi Scott-Moore became one of the first people to ask for protection under the law. Scott-Moore claimed that her employer discriminated because it did not provide benefits to her male partner, while providing benefits to partners of gay and lesbian co-workers.

On Friday, the Human Rights Commission said a federal law that governs some health care plans pre-empts the state civil-rights law invoked in Scott-Moore's case.

More:
http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2007/02/us-law-trumps-state-on-gay-rights.html

[baldguy]

1. Article IV

Section 1. Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state. And the Congress may by general laws prescribe the manner in which such acts, records, and proceedings shall be proved, and the effect thereof.

Section 2. The citizens of each state shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several states.

[Meeker Morgan]

2. It's going to have to be settled on the federal level ...

... preferably by legislation.

Well the Democratic Party has a majority in congress right now.

It's better to have an explicit law than some vague penumbra.