ADF, CAP brief: Ariz. lawmakers OK to reserve taxpayer-paid benefits for state employees, spouses

PHOENIX — The Arizona Legislature acted “reasonably and constitutionally” when it decided last year to pass a law that once again distributes taxpayer-funded benefits for state employees on the basis of marital status. That’s the conclusion of a friend-of-the-court brief submitted to a federal court Monday by Alliance Defense Fund attorneys on behalf of Center for Arizona Policy.

Former Gov. Janet Napolitano improperly bypassed the Legislature when she issued an administrative rule in 2008 that extended state employee benefits reserved for married couples to unmarried persons. The brief argues that the Legislature is simply returning to its previous practice of extending benefits to state employees and their spouses and disputes the conclusion of a federal judge that providing benefits on that basis violates the U.S. Constitution.

“It’s perfectly constitutional to manage taxpayer dollars in a way that nearly all government bodies in this country do--by offering marital benefits to married persons,” said ADF Litigation Counsel Jim Campbell. “Courts across the nation have repeatedly upheld issuing benefits on this basis.”

The friend-of-the-court brief, submitted to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit in Collins v. Brewer, explains that “the State has taken the unexceptional step of restoring its distribution of employment benefits on the basis of marital status, which is precisely what most governmental bodies in this country have typically done and continue to do.  In taking this step, the Legislature acted neither irrationally nor with animus toward any class of State employees.”

“State lawmakers have merely returned to what the state was offering before Gov. Napolitano unilaterally bypassed the Legislature to implement benefits that it did not approve,” said Center for Arizona Policy President Cathi Herrod. “The Legislature is doing exactly what taxpayers want: stopping improperly initiated government spending instead of furthering it.”

The brief also points out that because the Arizona Constitution defines marriage as the union of one man and one woman, “Limiting marital benefits to unions between one man and one woman is rationally related to furthering the State’s interest in encouraging mothers and fathers to stay together and raise their biological children.”

The brief was submitted along with a procedural motion that asks the court to accept the brief.

ADF is a legal alliance of Christian attorneys and like-minded organizations defending the right of people to freely live out their faith. Launched in 1994, ADF employs a unique combination of strategy, training, funding, and litigation to protect and preserve religious liberty, the sanctity of life, marriage, and the family.