Judge Dismisses Lesbian Lawsuit Against Rec Center ROCHESTER, Minn. (AP) ―
A district judge dismissed a discrimination lawsuit filed by two Rochester women Tuesday, saying the Rochester Athletic Club did not discriminate against the women by refusing to sell them a family membership. An attorney for Amy and Sarah Monson said they will appeal the decision to the Minnesota Court of Appeals.
"We respect the judge's decision but strongly disagree with it," said Phil Duran, staff attorney for OutFront Minnesota, the state's largest gay rights group, and one of the attorneys representing the women. Duran said he believes the club violated the Minnesota Human Rights Act by selling membership discounts only to heterosexuals.
The Monsons, identified as lesbian women in a committed relationship raising a child, filed a civil lawsuit against the club in March, claiming they were not allowed to purchase a family membership at the club in 2006 because they are not legally married.
Attorney Gregory Griffiths, representing the club and its owner, John Remick, moved for summary judgment in July. Judge Kevin Lund faxed his decision to attorneys Tuesday. Griffiths, in his argument for summary judgment, said the club's policy requires individuals -- whether male, female, heterosexual, gay, lesbian or bisexual -- to be legally married under Minnesota law to qualify for the family membership. He said the Monsons were given the opportunity to join the club, but didn't qualify for the family membership rate.
The judge said his decision shouldn't be viewed as a victory for the "traditional" family advocates or as a setback for gay and lesbian individuals or organizations advocating change. "It is neither," Lund said. The Rochester Athletic Club has chosen to define a family as a heterosexual legally married couple who files joint tax returns, he said, adding that his ruling is simply legal recognition that the state Human Rights Act does not afford protection within the context of the specific case for same-sex domestic partners. "This morally and legally defensible yet unrealistically narrow definition of family fails to recognize the underlying stability and commitment of the Monsons' relationship," the judge added. "Other, arguably more enlightened organizations, such as the Rochester Area Family Y, have chosen not to reduce the definition of family in such an anachronistic fashion," he said.
However, Lund said the athletic club is within its legal rights to define family as excluding same sex domestic couples. Lund said it is the job of the Legislature, not the courts, to determine whether nonmarital relationships such as the Monsons' deserve the statutory protection.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment