High Hopes for Equality in Hawaii

by Michael Jones · 2010-09-03 06:37:00 UTC

This wasn't entirely the summer of love in Hawaii. The state was prepared to move on civil unions legislation, but a July veto by current Gov. Linda Lingle crushed the dreams of same-sex couples hoping for some progress on equal rights. Gov. Lingle's veto was all the more crushing given the theatrics -- she wouldn't disclose her vote until after weeks of wrangling, only to call a press conference attended by civil unions supporters to announce her decision. Politics reached a callous low.

But all hope isn't lost in Hawaii. In the aftermath of Gov. Lingle's veto, Lambda Legal, filing suit on behalf of several same-sex couples, sued the state of Hawaii in court, alleging that the state's failure to provide civil unions for same-sex couples violates the state's constitution. It was a much needed move, returning Gov. Linda Lingle's middle finger to the LGBT community with a solid legal smackdown.

Now, several of the same-sex couples who are part of this lawsuit are speaking out, hoping that recent legal victories in California over Proposition 8, as well as a federal court victory in Massachusetts declaring parts of the Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional might help them in their legal push for civil unions.

"When you look at what's happening in California and Massachusetts — it's all good activity going on. It just keeps you hopeful," said Suzanne King, who along with her partner Tambry Young are part of Lambda Legal's lawsuit, according to the Honolulu Star Advertiser. About a decade ago, King was also part of a successful lawsuit against the state, petitioning to win the right to adopt a child that her partner Young gave birth to. Here's hoping her track record remains undefeated as this civil unions lawsuit moves forward.

Are civil unions as good as marriage equality? Well, as commissions in states like Vermont and New Jersey have proven, no, not even close. But, in Hawaii, civil unions are as good as it can currently get, in part because of a 1996 statewide constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage. Support for civil unions runs high in the state, and within the legislature (although not high enough to override Gov. Lingle's veto).

One thing that could upset the lawsuit for the better? The upcoming election, and notably Hawaii's gubernatorial race. Veto-loving Gov. Lingle is term-limited, and isn't able to run again. One candidate, Democrat Neil Abercrombie, includes in his platform support for civil unions. He's in a competitive primary against Honolulu Mayor Mufi Hannemann, who does not support civil unions. (Hannemann, interestingly enough, is a practicing Mormon, and is courting conservative religious voters in the primary.)

Whoever wins the Abercrombie/Hannemann primary wins the right to battle current Lt. Gov. James "Duke" Aiona, who is intensely against civil unions. His public position is to put gay rights related issues up for a vote. Yikes.

Yes, the future of equal rights in Hawaii is currently up in the air. But seeing hope alive and well in the wake of Gov. Lingle's veto? That rocks. As Lambda Legal's Jenny Pizer said when the group filed their case, "The state's equality guarantee at least has to mean same-sex couples should have the same rights and responsibilities, even if it's segmented off into a system that isn't as respected, understood and revered as marriage."

A step in the right direction toward equality. It's a start. And one that deserves supporting.

Photo credit: Peg Syverson

Michael Jones is a Change.org Editor. He has worked in the field of human rights communications for a decade, most recently for Harvard Law School.
PREVIOUS STORY:
Teacher Terminated From School for Being a Married Lesbian
NEXT STORY:
On Aeroflot's Birthday, Russian Activists Condemn Company's Anti-Gay Record. And You Can Help.

COMMENTS (4)

    Comment Policy

    · All fields are required to comment.

    [X]

    Comments on Change.org are meant for further exploration and evaluation of the campaign on Change.org. To that end, we welcome constructive comments. However, we reserve the right to delete comments which, as determined solely in our discretion: (1) are offensive, abusive, or off-topic; (2) include content solely intended to personally attack the campaign creator, (3) are designed to subvert or hijack comment threads rather than contribute to them; and/or (4) violate our terms of service and/or privacy policy. Repeat offenders may be permanently removed from the site at our discretion. Please also be advised that: (A) we do not actively curate and/or monitor in any manner whatsoever the comments made on the Change.org platform, and (B) the creator of each campaign on Change.org may remove any comment at her/his/its discretion.