The Supreme Court of Texas held that the U.S. Supreme Court opinion recognizing the right of same-sex couples to marry does not automatically entitle them to spousal employment benefits. The unanimous court held that the 2015 opinion in Obergefell v. Hodges did not address the right to tax, insurance, or other benefits–only the right to marry.
The Supreme Court of Texas heard oral arguments today in a case where Houston taxpayers sued urging that subsidizing employment benefits for the spouse of a same-sex couple is illegal. Lawyers for the taxpayers describe the case as “the only one of its kind in the nation.”
The Supreme Court of Texas decided to hear a Texas case fighting taxpayer-funded employment benefits for gay spouses.
Two taxpayers filed a motion for rehearing with the Texas Supreme Court on Monday to reconsider their order denying review of a case against the openly gay former Houston Mayor and the City of Houston. They urge that Mayor Annise Parker violated the Texas Constitution and state statutes when she gave spousal benefits to gay employees in 2013 and 2014. Parker issued these benefits to employees prior to the U.S. Supreme Court’s same-sex marriage ruling.
A Texas Supreme Court Justice has issued a dissenting opinion stating that while the U.S. Supreme Court has declared that same-sex couples may marry, the U.S. Constitution does not necessarily require cities to offer benefits to same-sex spouses of employees. While marriage may be a fundamental right, spousal benefits are not. He says that the same constitutional strict scrutiny does not apply to employment benefits.
