Article by Jeffrey G. Sherman
State and local governments have begun to expand their fair employment laws to include prohibitions against sexual orientation discrimination and marital status discrimination. To the extent, however, that they require private employers to offer domestic partner benefits to their employees, these laws have been held to be preempted by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA). This Article criticizes this interpretation of ERISA and argues that these domestic partner benefit laws should withstand ERISA preemption. Neither the express language of ERISA nor the general principles of federal preemption doctrine require the suppression of such state laws.
About the Author
Jeffrey G. Sherman. Professor of Law and Senior Advisor to the Graduate Program in Taxation, Chicago-Kent College of Law, Illinois Institute of Technology. B.A., J.D. Harvard University.
Citation
76 Tul. L. Rev. 373 (2001)