A civil union, also referred to as a civil partnership, is a legally recognized form of partnership similar to marriage. Beginning with Denmark in 1989, civil unions under one name or another have been established by law in many developed countries in order to provide same-sex couples rights, benefits, and responsibilities similar (in some countries, identical) to opposite-sex civil marriage. In some jurisdictions, such as Brazil, New Zealand, Uruguay, France and the U.S. states of Hawaii and Illinois, civil unions are also open to opposite-sex couples.

Many countries with civil unions recognize foreign unions if those are essentially equivalent to their own; for example, the United Kingdom lists equivalent unions in Civil Partnership Act Schedule 20.

Supporters of civil unions contend that civil unions grant same-sex couples equal rights to married couples.^[1] Some commentators, such as Ian Ayres, are critical of civil unions because they say they represent a separate status unequal to marriage.^[2][3] According to an American history scholar Nancy Cott "there really is no comparison, because there is nothing that is like marriage except marriage."^[4] Others, such as Robert Knight, are critical because they say civil unions endow the same rights and privileges of heterosexual marriages — alleging that they allow same-sex marriage by using a different name.^[5]

Overview and terminology[link]

The terms used to designate civil unions are not standardized, and vary widely from country to country. Government-sanctioned relationships that may be similar or equivalent to civil unions include civil partnerships, registered partnerships, domestic partnerships, significant relationships, reciprocal beneficiary relationships, common-law marriage, adult interdependent relationships, life partnerships, stable unions, civil solidarity pacts, and so on. The exact level of rights, benefits, obligations, and responsibilities also varies, depending on the laws of a particular country. Some jurisdictions allow same-sex couples to adopt, while others forbid them to do so, or allow adoption only in specified circumstances.

As used in the United States, beginning with the state of Vermont in 2000, the term civil union has connoted a status equivalent to marriage for same-sex couples; domestic partnership, offered by some states, counties, cities, and employers since as early as 1985,^[6] has generally connoted a lesser status with fewer benefits.^[7] However, the legislatures of the West Coast states of California, Oregon and Washington have preferred the term domestic partnership for enactments similar or equivalent to civil union laws in East Coast states.

Civil unions are not seen as a replacement for marriage by many in the gay community. "Marriage in the United States is a civil union; but a civil union, as it has come to be called, is not marriage," said Evan Wolfson of Freedom to Marry.^[8] "It is a proposed hypothetical legal mechanism, since it doesn’t exist in most places, to give some of the protections but also withhold something precious from gay people. There’s no good reason to do that." However, some opponents of same-sex marriage view the matter differently; Randy Thomasson, Executive Director of the Campaign for California Families, calls civil unions “homosexual marriage by another name” and contends that civil unions provide same-sex couples “all the rights of marriage available under state law.”^[5] The California Supreme Court, in the In Re Marriage Cases decision, noted nine differences^[9] in state law.

Civil unions are commonly criticised as being 'separate but equal', critics say they segregate same-sex couples by forcing them to use a separate institution. Supporters of same-sex marriage contend that treating same-sex couples differently from other couples under the law allows for inferior treatment and that if civil unions were the same as marriage there would be no reason for two separate laws. A New Jersey commission which reviewed the state's civil union law reported that the law "invites and encourages unequal treatment of same-sex couples and their children".^[10] Some have suggested that creating civil unions which are open to opposite-sex couples would avoid the accusations of apartheid.^[11] These have still been criticised as being 'separate but equal' by former New Zealand MP and feminist Marilyn Waring as same-sex couples remain excluded from the right to marry.^[12]

Proponents of civil unions say that they provide practical equality for same-sex couples and solve the problems over areas such as hospital visitation rights and transfer of property caused by lack of legal recognition.^[13] Proponents also say that creating civil unions is a more pragmatic way to ensure that same-sex couples have legal rights as it avoids the more controversial issues surrounding marriage.

Many supporters of same-sex marriage state that the word 'marriage' matters and that the term 'civil union' (and its equivalents) do not convey the emotional meaning or bring the respect that comes with marriage.^[10][14] Former US Solicitor General and attorney in the Perry v. Schwarzenegger case Theodore Olsen said that recognising same-sex couples under the term 'domestic partnership' stigmatizes gay people's relationships treating them as if they were "something akin to a commercial venture, not a loving union".^[15] Many also contend that the fact that civil unions are often not understood can cause difficulty for same-sex couples in emergency situations.^[16]

List of jurisdictions recognising same-sex unions[link]

Homosexual acts legal   Same-sex marriage   Other type of partnership (or unregistered cohabitation)   Marriage recognized but not performed   Same-sex unions not recognized

Homosexual acts illegal   Minimal penalty   Heavy penalty   Up to life in prison   Up to death Rings indicate local or case-by-case application.

---

• v
• t
• e

Argentina[link]

From 2003 the Argentine province of Rio Negro and the city of Buenos Aires allow domestic partnerships. The City of Villa Carlos Paz (Córdoba) allowed it from 2007. And since 2009 the city of Río Cuarto (Córdoba) allows Civil Unions too.

Australia[link]

Status of same-sex unions in Australia.

  Same-sex marriage

  Same-sex civil partnerships or relationship registers

  Domestic partnership agreement

  Defined statewide as "de facto"

Since 13 August 2004 (after assent) under the Marriage Amendment Act 2004 (Commonwealth law) which amended the Marriage Act 1961, the Australian Government has banned same-sex marriages from being performed or recognised in Australia and overseas at a Commonwealth level.^[17]

All levels of Australian Governments under nearly all Australian statutes do recognise same-sex couples as de facto couples as unregistered co-habitation or de facto status since 2009.^[18] From 1 July 2009 Centrelink recognised same-sex couples equally regarding social security – under the common-law marriage, de facto status or unregistered cohabitation.^[19]

Registered partnership recognition in state Governments:

	Official relationship status	Year of enactment
ACT	Civil Partnership	2008
New South Wales	Domestic Partnership (Registry)	2010
Northern Territory	Defined as 'De facto', no registry	–
Queensland	Civil Partnership	2012
South Australia	Domestic Partnership (Agreement)	2007
Tasmania	Registered Partnership (Registry)	2004
Victoria	Domestic Partnership (Registry)	2008
Western Australia	Defined as 'De facto', no registry	–

Australian legislation

• Recognition of same-sex unions in Australia at federal level
• Recognition of same-sex unions in the Australian Capital Territory
• LGBT rights in New South Wales
• Domestic partnership in Tasmania

Registered partnership recognition in local governments:

• City of Sydney, New South Wales – Registered partnerships since 2004;
• City of Melbourne, Victoria – Registered partnerships since 2007;
• City of Yarra, Victoria – Registered partnerships since 2007.

Brazil[link]

South America

  Same-sex marriage

  Other type of partnership

  Unrecognized or unknown

  No recognition, issue under consideration

  No recognition, same-sex marriage officially banned

  Same-sex sexual activity illegal

---

• v
• t
• e

Same-sex civil unions in Brazil are legal since May 5, 2011. Brazil's Supreme Court has voted overwhelmingly in favour of allowing same-sex couples the same legal rights as married couples. The decision was approved by 10-0 with one abstention. The ruling will give gay couples in "stable" partnerships the same financial and social rights enjoyed by those in opposite-sex relationships.^[20]

Canada[link]

In Canada:

• Domestic partnerships in Nova Scotia (2001),
• Civil unions in Quebec (2002),
• Common-law relationships in Manitoba (2002), and
• Adult interdependent relationships in Alberta (2003)

were extended to same-sex couples before the enactment (2005) nationwide of same-sex marriage in Canada.

Colombia[link]

In 2007, Colombia came close to passing a law granting legal recognition to same-sex couples, but the bill failed on final passage in one house of the national legislature. However, a court decision in October 2007 extended social security and health insurance rights to same-sex couples.^[21] On January 29, 2009, the Constitutional Court ruled that cohabitating same-sex couples must be given all rights offered to unmarried heterosexual couples.^[22] Making Colombia the first Latin American country to fully grant this right to all its citizens. Couples can claim these rights after living together for two years.

Ecuador[link]

The 2008 Constitution of Ecuador enacted civil unions between two people without regard to gender, giving same-sex couples the same rights as legally married heterosexual couples except for the right to adopt.^[23]

Europe[link]

Laws regarding same-sex partnerships in Europe

  Same-sex marriage

  Other type of partnership

  Unregistered cohabitation

  Unrecognized

  Constitution limits marriage to man and woman

---

• v
• t
• e

In Europe,

• Denmark (1989)
• Norway (1993–2008)
• Sweden (1995–2009)
• Iceland (1996–2010)
• Greenland (1996)
• Netherlands (1998)
• France (1999)
• Belgium (2000)
• Finland (2002)
• Germany (2001)
• Luxembourg (2004)
• Andorra (2005)
• United Kingdom (2005)
• Czech Republic (2006)
• Slovenia (2006)
• Switzerland (2007)
• Hungary (2009)
• Austria (2010)
• Ireland (2011)
• Isle of Man (2011)
• Liechtenstein (2011)
• Jersey (2012)

Denmark[link]

Civil unions were introduced in Denmark by law on June 7, 1989, the world's first such law, and came into effect October 1 that year. It has the name of a registered partnership (Danish: "registreret partnerskab"), but has almost all the same qualities as marriage. Today it provides all the same legal and fiscal rights and obligations that come with a heterosexual marriage, with two exceptions:

• laws making explicit reference to the sexes of a married couple don't apply to registered partnerships
• regulations by international treaties do not apply unless all signatories agree.

Registered partnership is by civil ceremony only. The Church of Denmark has yet to decide how to handle the issue, but the general attitude of the church seems positive but hesitant. Some priests perform blessings of gay couples, and this is accepted by the church, which states that the church blesses people, not institutions.

Divorce for registered partners follows the same rules as ordinary divorces.

Only citizens of Denmark, Finland, Sweden, Norway and Iceland can enter into a registered partnership in Denmark. This list is adjusted whenever a new country legalizes same-sex unions. This rule excludes foreigners from gaining a registered partnership status that would not be legally recognised in their home country or state.

As of January 1, 2002, there were more than 2,000 registered partnerships in Denmark, of which 220 had children.

On March 17, 2009, the Folketing introduced a bill that gives same-sex couples in registered partnerships the right to adopt jointly.^[24] This bill was approved on 4 May 2010 and took effect on 1 July 2010.^[25]

France[link]

The French law providing benefits to same-sex couples also applies to opposite-sex couples who choose this form of partnership over marriage. Known as the "Pacte civil de solidarité" (PACS), it is more easily dissolved than the divorce process applying to marriage. Tax benefits accrue immediately (only from 2007 on *Ref), while immigration benefits accrue only after the contract has been in effect for one year. The partners are required to have a common address, making it difficult for foreigners to use this law as a means to a residence permit, and difficult for French citizens to gain the right to live with a foreign partner – especially since the contract does not automatically give immigration rights, as does marriage.^[26]

Germany[link]

Germany (2001)

Hungary[link]

• Hungary (2009)

Liechtenstein[link]

Liechtenstein (2011) ^[27]

Netherlands[link]

In 2001, the Netherlands passed a law allowing same-sex couples to marry, in addition to its 1998 "registered partnership" law (civil union) for both same-sex and opposite-sex couples.

Republic of Ireland[link]

On 31 October 2007, during a parliamentary debate in Dáil Éireann on an opposition Bill to introduce civil unions, the government of the Republic of Ireland announced that it will be introducing its own legislation to create civil unions in March 2008.^[28] This was delayed but was released in June 2008. The Civil Partnership Bill, 2009 is expected to become law by October 2010 at the latest.^[29][30]

On Thursday, July 1, 2010 the lower house of the Irish Parliament Dáil Éireann passed the bill on Civil Partnerships unanimously. This bill allows civil partnerships of same-sex couples, and establishes an extensive package of rights, obligations and protections for same-sex couples who register as civil partners.^[31] The bill passed all stages of in both Houses of the Oireachtas,^[32] and came into effect on 1 January 2011. It had been expected that the first Civil Partnerships would take place in April 2011 due to : the need for further legislation to update Ireland's tax code and social welfare laws, and a legal requirement to give three months notice. However, the legislation does provide a mechanism for exemptions to be sought through the courts, and the first partnership between two men was registered on 7 February 2011.^[33]

Switzerland[link]

The Canton of Geneva has a law on cantonal level, the Partenariat cantonal (the Cantonal Domestic Partnership), since 2001. It grants unmarried couples, whether same-sex or opposite-sex, many rights, responsibilities and protections that married couples have. However, it does not allow benefits in taxation, social security, or health insurance premiums (unlike the federal law). Geneva was the first Canton to recognise same-sex couples through this law.

On September 22, 2002, voters in the Swiss canton of Zürich voted to extend a number of marriage rights to same-sex partners, including tax, inheritance, and social security benefits.^[34] The law is limited to same-sex couples, and both partners must have lived in the canton for six months and formally commit to running a household together and supporting and aiding each another.

Wikinews has related news: The Swiss vote yes to same-sex relationships and "Schengen/Dublin"

On June 5, 2005, voters extended this right to the whole of Switzerland, through a federal referendum. This was the first time that the civil union laws were affirmed in a nationwide referendum in any country. The Federal Domestic Partnership Law, reserved to same-sex couples came into force on January 1, 2007. Although it represents progress for gays and lesbians in Switzerland, adoption rights and medically assisted procreation are explicitly forbidden for same-sex domestic partners.^{[citation needed]}

United Kingdom[link]

In 2003, the British government announced plans to introduce civil partnerships which would allow same-sex couples the rights and responsibilities resulting from marriage. The Civil Partnership Bill was introduced into the House of Lords on March 30, 2004. After considering amendments made by the House of Commons, it was passed by the House of Lords, its final legislative hurdle, on November 17, 2004, and received Royal Assent on November 18. The Act came into force on 5 December 2005, and same-sex, but not opposite-sex, couples were able to form the civil partnerships from 19 December 2005 in Northern Ireland, 20 December 2005 in Scotland and 21 December 2005 in England and Wales.^[35] Separate provisions were included in the first Finance Act 2005 to allow regulations to be made to amend tax laws to give the same tax advantages and disadvantages to couples in civil partnerships as apply to married couples.

In order to counter claims that this is instituting same-sex marriage, government spokespersons emphasised that civil partnership is quite separate from marriage. However, in September 2011, the UK Government Announced that Same-Sex Civil Marriage would be legalised, by 2015 at the latest.^[36] The future status of civil partnerships is unclear.

Aside from the manner in which couples register and the non-use of the word "marriage", civil partnerships and civil marriages give exactly the same legal rights and operate under the same constrictions and it is not legal to be in both a civil partnership and a marriage at the same time. Nevertheless, some of those in favour of legal same-sex marriage object that civil partnerships fall short of granting equality. They see legal marriage and civil partnerships as artificially segregated institutions, and draw parallels with the racial segregation of the United States' past. Civil partnership ceremonies are prohibited by law from including religious readings, symbols or music, even if the church involved supports such use.^[37]

Both same-sex marriages and civil unions of other nations will be automatically considered civil partnerships under UK law providing they came within Section 20 of the Act. This means, in some cases, non-Britons from nations with civil unions will have greater rights in the UK than in their native countries. For example, a Vermont civil union would have legal standing in the UK, however in cases where one partner was American and the other British, the Vermont civil union would not provide the Briton with right of abode in Vermont (or any other US state or territory), whereas it would provide the American with right of abode in the UK.

In 2007, the Christian Party stood in the Scottish Parliament elections and criticised civil partnership in its manifesto as "inequitable, partial, and thus unfair" and demanded to change it to allow committed people that live together such as siblings, friends and parents and offsprings.^[38]

Mexico[link]

State recognition of same-sex relationships in Mexico.

  Same-sex marriage

  Same-sex civil unions recognized

  Unrecognized

On 9 November 2006, Mexico City's unicameral Legislative Assembly passed and approved (43–17) a bill legalizing same-sex civil unions, under the name Ley de Sociedades de Convivencia (Law for Co-existence Partnerships), which became effective in 16 March 2007.^[39] The law recognizes property and inheritance rights to same-sex couples. On 11 January 2007, the northern state of Coahuila, which borders Texas, passed a similar bill (20–13), under the name Pacto Civil de Solidaridad (Civil Pact of Solidarity).^[40] Unlike Mexico City's law, once same-sex couples have registered in Coahuila, the state protects their rights no matter where they live in the country.^[40] Twenty days after the law had passed, the country's first same-sex civil union took place in Saltillo, Coahuila.^[41] Civil unions have been proposed in at least six states since 2006.^[42]

In Colima, governor Mario Anguiano Moreno has agreed to discuss the legalization of civil unions and adoption by same-sex couples.^[43]

New Zealand[link]

On 9 December 2004 the New Zealand Parliament passed the Civil Union Bill, establishing civil unions for same-sex and opposite-sex couples. The debate over Civil Unions was highly divisive in New Zealand, inspiring great public emotion both for and against the passing. A companion bill, the Relationships (Statutory References) Bill was passed shortly thereafter to remove discriminatory provisions on the basis of relationship status from a range of statutes and regulations. As a result of these bills, all couples in New Zealand, whether married, in a civil union, or in a de facto partnership, now generally enjoy the same rights and undertake the same obligations. These rights extend to immigration, next-of-kin status, social welfare, matrimonial property and other areas.

The Civil Union Act came into effect on 26 April 2005 with the first unions able to occur from Friday 29 April 2005.

South Africa[link]

South Africa legalized same-sex marriage in 2006. Same-sex and opposite-sex couples may register their unions either as marriages or as civil partnerships, but there is no legal difference other than the name.

United States[link]

The first civil unions in the United States were offered by the state of Vermont in 2000. The federal government does not recognize these unions, and under the U.S. Defense of Marriage Act of 1996 (DOMA), other U.S. states are not obligated to recognize them. By the end of 2006, Connecticut and New Jersey had also enacted civil union laws; New Hampshire followed in 2007. Furthermore, California's domestic partnership law had been expanded to the point that it became practically a civil union law, as well. The same might be said for domestic partnership in the District of Columbia, domestic partnership in Washington, and domestic partnership in Oregon.

Laws regarding same-sex partnerships in the United States

  Same-sex marriage¹

  Unions granting rights similar to marriage^1,2

  Legislation granting limited/enumerated rights¹

  Same-sex marriages performed elsewhere recognized¹

  No specific prohibition or recognition of same-sex marriages or unions

  Statute bans same-sex marriage

  Constitution bans same-sex marriage²

  Constitution bans same-sex marriage and some or all other kinds of same-sex unions

---

¹May include recent laws or court decisions which have created legal recognition of same-sex relationships, but which have not entered into effect yet.
²Same-sex marriage laws in California are complicated; please see the article on same-sex marriage in California.

• v
• t
• e

Jurisdictions in the U.S. that offer civil unions or domestic partnerships granting nearly all of the state-recognized rights of marriage to same-sex couples include:

• Domestic partnership in California (2000 – expanded over time)
• Civil union in New Jersey (2007)
• Domestic partnership in Oregon (2008)
• Domestic partnership in the District of Columbia (1992 law implemented, 2002 became effective – expanded over time)
• Domestic partnership in Washington (2007 – expanded over time)
• Domestic partnership in Nevada (2009)
• Civil union in Illinois (2011)
• Civil union in Rhode Island (2011)
• Civil union in Hawaii (2012)
• Civil union in Delaware (2012)

States in the U.S. with domestic partnerships or similar status granting some of the rights of marriage include:

• Reciprocal beneficiary relationship in Hawaii (1997)
• Domestic partnership in Maine (2004);
• Domestic partnership in New Jersey (2004);
• Designated beneficiary agreement in Colorado (2009).
• Domestic partnership in Wisconsin (2009).

California[link]

The notion of civil unions is rejected by some, such as this protester at a large demonstration in New York City against California Proposition 8.^[44]

In California, where domestic partnership (DP) has been available to same-sex and certain opposite-sex couples since 2000, a wholesale revision of the law in 2005 made it substantially equivalent to marriage at the state level. In 2007, the Legislature took a further step toward equality when it required same-sex DP couples to file state income taxes jointly. (Couples must continue to file federal taxes as individuals.) In the May 2008 In Re Marriage Cases decision, the state supreme court noted nine differences between Domestic Partnerships and same-sex marriage in state law, including a cohabitation requirement for domestic partners, access to CalPERS long-term care insurance (but not CalPERS in general), and the lack of an equivalent to California's "confidential marriage" institution.^[9] The cohabitation requirement was dropped on January 1, 2012, and a "confidential option" for domestic partners became available the same day.

Connecticut[link]

In 2005, the Connecticut General Assembly passed a bill to adopt civil unions in Connecticut. Connecticut's civil unions were identical to marriage and provided all of the same rights and responsibilities except for the title. Connecticut was the first state in the U.S. to voluntarily pass a same-sex civil unions law through the legislature without any immediate court intervention.^[45] The law was repealed on October 1, 2010, and replaced with a law making marriage gender-neutral.

Delaware[link]

Delaware Governor Jack Markell signed a civil union bill on May 12, 2011, that establishes civil unions in the state effective January 1, 2012.^[46]

District of Columbia[link]

Same-sex marriage in the District of Columbia was legalized on December 18, 2009. Marriage licenses became available on March 3, 2010, and marriages began on March 9, 2010. *Domestic Partnerships in the District of Columbia (1992 law implemented, 2002 law came into effect – expanded over time to 2009)

Hawaii[link]

Hawaii legalized civil unions for same-sex and opposite-sex couples on January 1, 2012.

Illinois[link]

On December 1, 2010 the Illinois state senate passed, in a 32-24-1 vote, SB1716 the "Illinois Religious Freedom Protection and Civil Union Act" just one day after the Illinois House of Representatives did the same in a 61-52-2 vote. On January 31, 2011, Illinois state Governor Pat Quinn signed SB1716 into law, establishing civil unions for same-sex and opposite-sex couples. The new law came into effect on June 1, 2011. The provision allowing opposite-sex couples to establish a civil union effectively doubles as a tool for widowed seniors to keep survivor's benefits from a marriage while gaining marital rights at the state level with another partner.^[47]

Maine[link]

Maine legalized domestic partnership for same-sex and opposite-sex couples in 2004. Maine's domestic partnership registry only provides limited rights, most of which are geared toward protecting couples' security in emergency situations.

New Hampshire[link]

On April 26, 2007, the New Hampshire General Court (state legislature) passed a civil union bill, and Governor John Lynch signed the bill into law on May 31, 2007.^[48] At the time, New Hampshire was "...the first state to embrace same-sex unions without a court order or the threat of one."^[49] The New Hampshire civil union legislation became effective on January 1, 2008.^[50] The law was replaced by the same-sex marriage law on January 1, 2010.

New Jersey[link]

On October 25, 2006, the Supreme Court of New Jersey gave New Jersey lawmakers 180 days to rewrite the state's marriage laws, either including same-sex couples or creating a new system of civil unions for them. On December 14 the Legislature passed a bill establishing civil unions in New Jersey, which was signed into law by Governor Jon Corzine on December 21, 2006. The first civil unions took place on February 19, 2007.^[51]

There are differences between civil unions and domestic partnerships. In 2004, the state of New Jersey enacted a domestic partnership law, offering certain limited rights and benefits to same-sex and different-sex couples. In 2006, however, after a state Supreme Court ruling that same-sex couples must be extended all the rights and benefits of marriage, the Legislature passed a civil unions law, effective in 2007, which is an attempt to satisfy the court's ruling.

Nevada[link]

On May 31, 2009, the Nevada legislature overrode Governor Jim Gibbons' veto of a domestic partnership bill. The bill allows registered domestic partners, gay or straight, to have most of the state level rights and responsibilities afforded to married couples. It does not require any other entity to provide rights or benefits afforded to married individuals. This has left the partnership bill ineffective compared to those of other states. The law took effect 1 October 2009.

Oregon[link]

Since 4 February 2008, Oregon offers domestic partnerships which grant nearly all of the state-recognized rights of marriage to same-sex couples.

Rhode Island[link]

Civil unions are permitted in the State of Rhode Island as of July 1, 2011.

Vermont[link]

The controversial civil unions law^[52] that was passed in the Vermont General Assembly in 2000 was a response to the Vermont Supreme Court ruling in Baker v. Vermont, requiring that the state grant same-sex couples the same rights and privileges accorded to married couples under the law.

A Vermont civil union is nearly identical to a legal marriage, as far as the rights and responsibilities for which state law, not federal law, is responsible are concerned.^[52] It grants partners next-of-kin rights and other protections that heterosexual married couples also receive. However, despite the "full faith and credit" clause of the United States Constitution, civil unions are generally not recognized outside Vermont in the absence of specific legislation. Opponents of the law have supported the Defense of Marriage Act and the proposed Federal Marriage Amendment in order to prevent obligatory recognition of same-sex couples in other jurisdictions. This means that many of the advantages of marriage, which fall in the federal jurisdiction (over 1,100 federal laws, such as joint federal income tax returns, visas and work permits for the foreign partner of a U.S. citizen, etc.), are not extended to the partners of a Vermont civil union.

As far as voluntary recognition of the civil union in other jurisdictions is concerned, New York City's Domestic Partnership Law, passed in 2002, recognizes civil unions formalized in other jurisdictions. Germany's international civil law (EGBGB) also accords to Vermont civil unions the same benefits and responsibilities that apply in Vermont, as long as they do not exceed the standard accorded by German law to a German civil union. The law was replaced by the same-sex marriage law on September 1, 2009.

Washington[link]

Washington offers domestic partnerships which grant nearly all of the state-recognized rights of marriage to same-sex couples. Washington is the first state to have passed a same sex union bill by a popular vote.

• Domestic partnership in Washington (2007 law implemented and effective – expanded over time to 2009)

Uruguay[link]

Civil unions in Uruguay were allowed nationwide from January 1, 2008.

Venezuela[link]

Civil unions are recognized in Mérida ^[53]

See also[link]

• Common-law marriage
• Domestic partnership
• Marriage privatization
• Same-sex marriage
• Same-sex union
• Convention on the recognition of registered partnerships

References[link]

External links[link]

• The European Laboratory on Marriage and Registered Partnership
• The Vermont Guide to Civil Unions, Vermont Secretary of State
• Civil Union Fact Sheet, Australian Capital Territory web site
• Same-Sex Marriage, Civil Unions, and Domestic Partnerships topic page from The New York Times

v t e Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) topics   Academic fields Discourse LGBT topics in education Gender studies Lavender linguistics Lesbian feminism LGBT literature LGBT/Queer studies Queer theory Transfeminism   Community Culture Anthems Bars Bisexual community Coming out Community center Drag king Drag queen Gay friendly Icons Lesbian utopia Literature Music Neighborhoods Organizations Periodicals Pride Pride parade Religious groups Rodeos Same-sex relationships Slang List of slang Slogans Symbols Tourism Category:LGBT culture   Gender identities Sexual identities Gender identities Male Female Androgyne Bigender Boi Cisgender Genderqueer Girlfag and guydyke Intersex Pangender Transgender Womyn Third sex / Third gender Akava'ine Eunuch Fa'afafine Fakaleiti Femminiello Hijra Kathoey Khanith Mahu Mukhannathun Muxe Bissu Two-Spirit Hermaphrodite Sexual orientation identities Sexual orientations Asexual Bisexual Heterosexual Homosexual Ex-gay Ex-ex-gay Pansexual Polyamorous Banjee Gay Lesbian Queer Same gender loving Non-heterosexual Object sexuality Questioning Related Gender roles Human female sexuality Human male sexuality Sexuality and gender identity-based cultures   History LGBT history History of lesbianism LGBT History Timeline Social movements History of Christianity and homosexuality History of same-sex unions Pederasty Category:LGBT history Pre-modern era Adelphopoiesis Homosexuality in ancient Greece Homosexuality in ancient Rome Homosexuality in ancient Egypt Homosexuality in ancient Peru Homosexuality in medieval Europe 16th to 19th century Mollies Urnings 20th century Gay Liberation Homosexuals in Nazi Germany and the Holocaust Inversion Sea queens Stonewall riots Festival of Light action White Night riots Queer theory 21st century Same-sex marriage Post-Queer Theory   Rights Legal issues LGBT rights by country or territory Africa Americas Asia Europe Oceania List of LGBT rights articles by region LGBT rights topics Adoption Civil unions and partnerships Hate crime laws Legal aspects of transsexualism Military service Parenting Same-sex marriage (Status Timeline) Socialism Sodomy laws United Nations/Yogyakarta Principles LGBT rights movements Gay Liberation LGBT rights groups LGBT rights activists   Sexual orientations – Medicine, science and sexology Biology Birth order Demographics Environment Heterosexual–homosexual continuum Homosexuality and psychology Kinsey scale Klein Grid Mental roots Neuroscience Prenatal hormones Sexual orientation change efforts Sexual orientation identity Timeline of sexual orientation and medicine   Social attitudes Prejudice Violence Social attitudes Anti-LGBT slogans Heteronormativity Gay panic LGBT rights opposition LGBT stereotypes Religion and homosexuality Transgenderism and religion Prejudice & Discrimination AIDS stigma Biphobia Heterosexism Homophobia Internalized homophobia Lesbophobia Riddle scale Transphobia Violence against LGBT people Corrective rape Gay bashing History of violence in the UK History of violence in the US Significant acts of violence against LGBT people Trans-bashing Unlawfully killed transgender people LGBT suicides Category:LGBT LGBT portal

Rahm Emanuel
55th Mayor of Chicago
Incumbent
Assumed office May 16, 2011
Preceded by	Richard Daley
23rd White House Chief of Staff
In office January 20, 2009 – October 1, 2010
President	Barack Obama
Deputy	Mona Sutphen Jim Messina
Preceded by	Joshua Bolten
Succeeded by	Pete Rouse (Acting)
Chairman of the House Democratic Caucus
In office January 3, 2007 – January 3, 2009
Preceded by	Jim Clyburn
Succeeded by	John Larson
Chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee
In office January 3, 2005 – January 3, 2007
Preceded by	Bob Matsui
Succeeded by	Chris Van Hollen
Member of the U.S. House of Representatives from Illinois's 5th district
In office January 3, 2003 – January 3, 2009
Preceded by	Rod Blagojevich
Succeeded by	Mike Quigley
Senior Advisor to the President for Policy and Strategy
In office 1993–1998
President	Bill Clinton
Personal details
Born	(1959-11-29) November 29, 1959 (age 52) Chicago, Illinois, United States
Political party	Democratic Party
Spouse(s)	Amy Rule
Children	1 son 2 daughters
Alma mater	Sarah Lawrence College Northwestern University
Religion	Modern Orthodox Judaism
Signature

Rahm Israel Emanuel^[1] (pronounced /ˈrɑːm/; born November 29, 1959) is an American politician and the 55th and current Mayor of Chicago.^[2][3] He was formerly White House Chief of Staff to President Barack Obama. He served as senior advisor to President Bill Clinton from 1993 to 1998 and as a Democratic member of the United States House of Representatives, representing Illinois's 5th congressional district, from 2003 until his resignation in 2009 to take his position in the Obama Administration.

Emanuel was chair of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee during the 2006 mid-term elections and remained a top strategist for House Democrats during the 2008 cycle. After Democrats regained control of the House in 2006, Emanuel was elected chairman of the Democratic Caucus. This made him the fourth-ranking House Democrat, behind Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Majority Leader Steny Hoyer and Majority Whip Jim Clyburn.^[4]

Two days after Obama's election victory, Emanuel was announced as Obama's designee for White House Chief of Staff.^[5] He resigned from the House on January 2, 2009,^[6] and began his duties as Chief of Staff on January 20, 2009, the day of Obama's inauguration.^[5]

Emanuel resigned as Chief of Staff effective October 1, 2010, in order to pursue a campaign to run for Mayor of Chicago pending the announced retirement of six-term incumbent Richard M. Daley. On January 27, 2011, the Illinois Supreme Court reversed a lower court's ruling^[7] that had cast doubt on Emanuel's candidacy; the court unanimously held that Emanuel did not abandon his Chicago residency by serving in the White House, thus affirming his eligibility to run for mayor.^[8] He won the Mayoral election on February 22, 2011, with 55% of the vote.^[9] President Obama appointed William M. Daley, the brother of Emanuel's predecessor as mayor, as Chief of Staff to replace Emanuel.

Early and personal life[link]

Emanuel was born in Chicago, Illinois, to Jewish parents.^[6] His father, Benjamin M. Emanuel, is a Jerusalem-born^[10] pediatrician who was once a member of the Irgun, a Jewish paramilitary organization that operated in Mandate Palestine. His mother, Marsha Smulevitz, is the daughter of a Chicago union organizer.^[1] She worked in the civil rights movement and owned, briefly, a local rock and roll club.^[11] She is now a psychiatric social worker.^[11] The two met in Chicago in the 1950s.^[1] Emanuel's older brother Ezekiel Emanuel is an oncologist and bioethicist at the National Institutes of Health, and his younger brother Ari Emanuel, a Hollywood talent agent.^[12] He has an adopted sister, Shoshanna, who is 14 years younger.^[11] Emanuel's grandfather was a Romanian Jew from Moldova.^[13]

Emanuel's first name, Rahm (רם) means high or lofty in Hebrew.^[14][15] The surname Emanuel (עמנואל), adopted by the family in honor of his father's brother Emanuel Auerbach, who was killed in the 1948 Arab–Israeli War in Jerusalem, means God is with us. Sources disagree as to whether the family name was changed in 1933 or 1938.^[11][14][15]

When the family lived in Chicago, Emanuel attended the Bernard Zell Anshe Emet Day School. After his family moved to Wilmette, he attended public schools: Romona School, Locust Junior High School, and New Trier West High School.^[1][16] He and his brothers attended summer camp in Israel, including just after the 1967 Six-Day War.^[11][17]

While working at an Arby's restaurant in his high school years, Emanuel severely cut his right middle finger on a meat slicer. He sought medical attention after suffering a severe infection from swimming in Lake Michigan and as a result, had his finger partially amputated.^[18]

Emanuel was encouraged by his mother to take ballet lessons as a boy and is a graduate of the Evanston School of Ballet as well as a student of The Joel Hall Dance Center, where his children also took dance lessons. He won a scholarship to the Joffrey Ballet, but turned it down to attend Sarah Lawrence College, a liberal arts school with a strong dance program.

He graduated from Sarah Lawrence College in 1981 with a B.A. in Liberal Arts, and went on to receive an M.A. in Speech and Communication from Northwestern University in 1985. While an undergraduate, Emanuel was elected to the Sarah Lawrence Student Senate. He also joined the congressional campaign of David Robinson of Chicago.^[19]

During the 1991 Gulf War, Emanuel volunteered with the Israel Defense Forces as a civilian helping to maintain equipment.^[20]

Emanuel's wife, Amy Rule, converted to Judaism shortly before their wedding.^[21] They are members of the Chicago synagogue Anshe Sholom B'nai Israel.^[22] They have a son and two daughters.

Emanuel is a close friend of fellow Chicagoan David Axelrod, chief strategist for the 2008 Barack Obama presidential campaign. Axelrod signed the ketuba, the Jewish marriage contract, at Emanuel's wedding.^[23]

Rabbi Asher Lopatin of Anshe Sholom B'nai Israel Congregation is quoted as saying Emanuel's family is "a very involved Jewish family", adding that "Amy was one of the teachers for a class for children during the High Holidays two years ago."^[22] Emanuel has said of his Judaism: "I am proud of my heritage and treasure the values it has taught me."^[22] Emanuel's family lives on the North Side of Chicago, in the South East Ravenswood neighborhood.^[14]

Emanuel trains for and participates in triathlons.^[16]

Career as political staffer[link]

Emanuel began his political career with the public interest and consumer rights organization Illinois Public Action.^[24] He went on to serve in a number of capacities in local and national politics, initially specializing in fundraising for Illinois campaigns and then nationally.^[25]

Emanuel worked for Democrat Paul Simon's 1984 election to the U.S. Senate, was the national campaign director for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee in 1988, and was senior advisor and chief fundraiser for Richard M. Daley's victorious campaign for Mayor of Chicago in 1989.^[24]

At the start of then-Arkansas Governor Bill Clinton's presidential primary campaign, Emanuel was appointed to direct the campaign's finance committee.^[25] Emanuel insisted that Clinton schedule a lot of time for fundraising and greatly delay campaigning in New Hampshire. Clinton agreed and embarked on an aggressive fundraising campaign across the nation. The fundraising paid off later, providing the campaign a vital buffer to keep buying television time as attacks on Clinton's character threatened to swamp the campaign during the New Hampshire primary.^[22]

Clinton's primary rival, Paul Tsongas (the New Hampshire Democratic primary winner in 1992), later withdrew, citing a lack of campaign funds. Richard Mintz, a Washington public relations consultant who worked with Emanuel on the campaign, spoke about the soundness of the idea: "It was that [extra] million dollars that really allowed the campaign to withstand the storm we had to ride out in New Hampshire [over Clinton's relationship with Gennifer Flowers and the controversy over his draft status during the Vietnam War]."^[22] Emanuel's knowledge of the top donors in the country, and his rapport with "the heavily Jewish donor community" helped Clinton amass a then-unheard-of sum of $72 million.^[22]

Following the campaign, Emanuel became a senior advisor to Clinton at the White House from 1993 to 1998. In the White House, Emanuel was initially Assistant to the President for Political Affairs and then Senior Advisor to the President for Policy and Strategy. He was a leading strategist in the unsuccessful White House efforts to institute universal healthcare and many other Clinton initiatives.^[26]

Emanuel is known for his "take-no-prisoners style" that has earned him the nickname "Rahmbo."^[27] Emanuel is said to have sent a dead fish in a box to a pollster who was late delivering polling results.^[23] On the night after the 1996 election, "Emanuel was so angry at the president's enemies that he stood up at a celebratory dinner with colleagues from the campaign, grabbed a steak knife and began rattling off a list of betrayers, shouting 'Dead! ... Dead! ... Dead!' and plunging the knife into the table after every name."^[11][12] Before Tony Blair gave a pro-Clinton speech during the impeachment crisis, Emanuel reportedly screamed to Blair's face "Don't fuck this up!" while Clinton was present; Blair and Clinton both burst into laughter.^[28] However, by 2007 friends of Emanuel were saying that he has "mellowed out".^[22] Stories of his personal style have entered the popular culture, inspiring articles and websites that chronicle these and other quotes and incidents.^{[29][30][31][32]} Though executive producer Lawrence O'Donnell has denied it,^[33] the character Josh Lyman in The West Wing is said to be based on Rahm Emanuel.^[12][34]

One of his proudest moments during the Clinton administration "was an event that touched his political sensibilities and his personal ties to Israel: the 1993 Rose Garden signing ceremony after the Oslo Accords between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization. Emanuel directed the details of the ceremony, down to the choreography of the famous handshake between Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and PLO leader Yasser Arafat."^[22]

Career in finance[link]

After serving as an advisor to Bill Clinton, in 1998 Emanuel resigned from his position in the Clinton administration and joined the investment banking firm of Wasserstein Perella, where he worked until 2002.^[35] Although he did not have an MBA degree or prior banking experience, he became a managing director at the firm’s Chicago office in 1999 and, according to Congressional disclosures, made $16.2 million in his two-and-a-half-years as a banker.^[35][36] At Wasserstein Perella, he worked on eight deals, including the acquisition by Commonwealth Edison of Peco Energy and the purchase by GTCR Golder Rauner of the SecurityLink home security unit from SBC Communications.^[35]

Emanuel was named to the Board of Directors of the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac) by President Clinton in 2000. His position earned him at least $320,000, including later stock sales.^[37][38] He was not assigned to any of the board's working committees, and the Board met no more than six times per year.^[38]

During Rahm's time on the board, Freddie Mac was plagued with scandals involving campaign contributions and accounting irregularities.^[38][39] The Obama Administration rejected a request under the Freedom of Information Act to review Freddie Mac board minutes and correspondence during Emanuel's time as a director.^[38]

The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) later accused the board of having "failed in its duty to follow up on matters brought to its attention." Emanuel resigned from the board in 2001 when he ran for Congress.^[40]

Congressional career[link]

Rep. John Dingell and Rep. Emanuel celebrate Paczki Day, February 28, 2006.

Election in 2002[link]

Congressman Emanuel speaking at St. Hyacinth Basilica in Chicago's Polish Village.

After working in investment banking, in 2002 Emanuel pursued the U.S. House seat in the 5th District of Illinois previously held by Rod Blagojevich, who chose not to run for re-election, but instead successfully ran for Governor of Illinois.

Rahm's strongest opponent of the seven other candidates in the 2002 Democratic primary was former Illinois State Representative Nancy Kaszak, who had unsuccessfully opposed Blagojevich in the 1996 primary. The most controversial moment of the primary election came when Edward Moskal, president of the Polish American Congress, a political action committee endorsing Kaszak, called Emanuel a "millionaire carpetbagger who knows nothing" about "our heritage". Moskal also charged that Emanuel had dual citizenship with Israel and had served in the Israeli Army.^[41] Emanuel did not serve in the Israeli army, but was a civilian volunteer assisting the Israel Defense Forces for a short time during the 1991 Gulf War, repairing truck brakes in one of Israel's northern bases with Sar-El.^[42][43] Emanuel brought together a coalition of Chicago clergy to denounce the incident. He recalled, "One of the proudest moments of my life was seeing people of my district from all backgrounds demonstrate our common values by coming together in response to this obvious attempt to divide them."^[22] Moskal's comments were denounced as anti-Semitic by Kaszak.^[41]

Emanuel won the primary and defeated Republican candidate Mark Augusti in the general election.

Emanuel was elected after the October 2002 joint Congressional resolution authorizing the Iraq War, and thus was not able to vote on it. However, in the lead up to the resolution, Emanuel spoke out strongly in support of the war, urging a United States' "muscular projection of force" in Iraq. Emanuel has been the focus of anti-war protests for his support of funding bills for the war in Iraq, and his support, during Democratic party primaries, of Democratic party candidates that are more hawkish. In his first term, Rahm Emanuel was a founding member and the Co-Chair of the Congressional Serbian Caucus.^[44]

In January 2003, Emanuel was named to the House Financial Services Committee, and sat on the subcommittee that oversaw Freddie Mac. A few months later, Freddie Mac Chief Executive Officer Leland Brendsel was forced out, and the committee and subcommittee commenced hearings lasting for more than a year. Emanuel skipped every hearing allegedly for reasons of avoiding any appearance of favoritism, impropriety, or conflict of interest.^[45]

Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee chairman[link]

Emanuel assumed the position of Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee chairman (DCCC) after the death of the previous chair, Bob Matsui. Emanuel led the Democratic Party's effort to capture the majority in the House of Representatives in the 2006 elections. The documentary HouseQuake, featuring Emanuel, chronicles those elections.^[46] After Emanuel's election as chairman of the Democratic Caucus, Chris Van Hollen became committee chair for the 110th Congress.

While chairman of the DCCC, Emanuel was known to have had disagreements over Democratic election strategy with Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean. Dean favored a "fifty-state strategy", building support for the Democratic Party over the long term, while Emanuel believed a more tactical approach, focusing attention on key districts, was necessary to ensure victory.^[47]

Ultimately the Democratic Party enjoyed considerable success in the 2006 elections, gaining 30 seats in the House. Emanuel has received considerable praise for his stewardship of the DCCC during this election cycle, even from Illinois Republican Rep. Ray LaHood who said "He legitimately can be called the golden boy of the Democratic Party today. He recruited the right candidates, found the money and funded them, and provided issues for them. Rahm did what no one else could do in seven cycles."^[48] However, he also faced some criticism for his failure to support some progressive candidates, as Howard Dean advocated.^[49]

2008 Election[link]

Emanuel speaks during the second day of the 2008 Democratic National Convention in Denver, Colorado.

Emanuel declared in April 2006 that he would support Hillary Rodham Clinton should she pursue the presidency in 2008. Emanuel remained close to Clinton since leaving the White House, talking strategy with her at least once a month as chairman of the DCCC.^[16] However, Emanuel's loyalties came into conflict when his home-state senator Barack Obama expressed interest in the race; asked in January 2007 about his stance on the Democratic presidential nomination, he said: "I'm hiding under the desk. I'm very far under the desk, and I'm bringing my paper and my phone."^[50] Emanuel remained neutral in the race until June 4, 2008, the day after the final primary contests, when he endorsed the eventual winner Obama.^[51]

Emanuel won re-election to the House, defeating Republican candidate Tom Hanson. Open Secrets reported that Emanuel "was the top House recipient in the 2008 election cycle of contributions from hedge funds, private equity firms and the larger securities/investment industry".^[52] Securities and investments business interests were the main sector contributing to Emanuel's campaigns in both 2006 and 2008.^[53]

House leadership[link]

After his role in helping the Democrats win the 2006 elections, Emanuel was believed to be a leading candidate for the position of Majority Whip. Nancy Pelosi, who became the next Speaker of the House, persuaded him not to challenge Jim Clyburn, but instead to succeed Clyburn in the role of Democratic Caucus Chairman. In return, Pelosi agreed to assign the caucus chair more responsibilities, including "aspects of strategy and messaging, incumbent retention, policy development and rapid-response communications." Caucus vice-chair John Larson remained in this role instead of running for the chairman position.^[54]

After U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney asserted that he did not fall within the bounds of orders set for the executive branch, Emanuel called for cutting off the $4.8 million the Executive Branch provides for the Vice President's office.^[55]

Political views[link]

Emanuel joins Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich to advocate changes to Medicare legislation, September 24, 2003.

During his original 2002 campaign, Emanuel "indicated his support of President Bush's position on Iraq, but said he believed the president needed to better articulate his position to the American people".^[22] One of the major goals he spoke of during the race was "to help make health care affordable and available for all Americans".^[22]

In the 2006 congressional primaries, Emanuel, then head of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, made national headlines for engineering a run by Tammy Duckworth — an Iraq war veteran with no political experience — against grassroots candidate Christine Cegelis in Illinois' 6th District. Expedited withdrawal from Iraq was a central point of Cegelis' campaign; Duckworth opposed a withdrawal timetable.^[56]