IN PICTURES: 5 Years After Legalized Same-Sex Marriage, Family Law Shifts for Couples 'Not Immune to Divorce'
There are 1,138 legal protections that come with the institution of marriage. Five years ago, before same-sex marriage became legal nationwide,…
June 25, 2020 at 03:40 PM
5 minute read
There are 1,138 legal protections that come with the institution of marriage. Five years ago, before same-sex marriage became legal nationwide, Philadelphia lawyer Angela Giampolo did her best to recreate some of those protections for her LGBTQ clients. Giampolo would draft agreements for couples to launch businesses together, contract out their intent to share ownership of their family homes, and make sure their wills and estate plans gave the surviving spouse or children the inheritance that the deceased partner desired. The U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges, issued five years ago today on June 26, 2015, transformed Giampolo's practice. "It has made it easier. I don't have to be so creative," said Giampolo, principal in Giampolo Law Group in Philadelphia and Mount Laurel, New Jersey. "Allowing marriage equality has allowed a whole area of law and common-law divorce to come forward." In the five years since marriage equality spread across the United States, the main impact has been on those LGBTQ couples who tied the knot and started families. But lawyers also experienced many changes since Obergefell established the constitutional right to marriage equality. It ushered in a new way of practicing law for LGBTQ law attorneys, and opened a new market for family lawyers. |
Growing practice area
Giampolo said that in the past five years since the marriage equality ruling, she's observed many existing family law attorneys enter the LGBTQ market. "You'll see a lot of everyday family law firms advertising to the LGBTQ community," said Giampolo. "Letting the world know they are accepting and they will service their legal needs just like everyone else." Some family lawyers who are new to representing LGBTQ couples may face challenges if they don't know the unique, different aspects of LGBTQ family law, said Cathy Sakimura, deputy director of the National Center for Lesbian Rights in San Francisco, California. "It's great to see how the bar is opening up and letting go of past homophobia and transphobia, and representing people," Sakimura said. "But it's hard for people who are not connected to the community to understand those unique aspects." For example, there's a big question about how to treat pre-Obergefell common law marriage in Texas and other similar states, she said. Sakimura said that when the Supreme Court declares a law unconstitutional, it means the law has always been unconstitutional---it applies retroactively. But LGBTQ people have met resistance when they try to prove their common-law marriages existed before Obergefell, Sakimura said. "So far, every court has recognized that it applies retroactively," she said. "It's a big issue in Texas." |
Presumed parent
Some of the biggest legal issues arise when LGBTQ spouses have children. Sakimura said every state has recognition that when a wife gives birth, her husband is presumed to be the father. But some states have mounted resistance to extending that presumption to LGBTQ parents, said Sakimura. The parentage issue is the biggest one in the LGBTQ family law practice of Meghan Freed, managing partner in Freed Marcroft in Hartford, Connecticut. "That can vary very much from state-to-state, even with a fully recognized legal marriage," Freed said. "Right now, in Connecticut, same-sex parents get the same marital presumption: That children are of the marriage, if they are born in the marriage. But the presumption is rebuttable. Even in Connecticut, we want to see an adoption. … It's even more important in the event of any move from state to state." Same-sex marriage has been legal in Connecticut since 2008. But before the Obergefell ruling, LGBTQ couples married there could not move to another state and have their marriages recognized. They couldn't get divorced if they moved to another state. "Obergefell, in terms of its impact on family law, one of the main things it did was help give people confidence about the portability of their marriages," Freed said. One dispute in litigation since Obergefell centers around the length of a marriage and its impact on asset distribution. Freed noted that an LGBTQ couple may have been in a relationship for decades, but married only five years ago. When getting divorced, the court only considers the married years when deciding who gets what. "It's a five year marriage, but it's a 25-year partnership," she noted. "It's an issue out there, which is what leads many same-sex couples to use alternative dispute resolution like mediation or collaborative law, to reach an agreement that honors their family structure rather than litigate it and find out." Giampolo, the Philadelphia LGBTQ law attorney, said the biggest difference in her family law practice post-Obergefell has been how many premarital agreements she needs to draft. It's because many LGBTQ couples get married when they are older. They've seen what marriage can do to people, and have a pragmatic view that marriage is like a contract, Giampolo said. Premarital agreements allow them to map out how those assets will be shared or separated, she said. "We've been watching straight people mess it up for 300 years. We are not immune to divorce," Giampolo explained. "Due to the fact we were just given this right five years ago, the people getting married tend to be older, and they tend to have assets."
Related stories:
Lawyers Note Skepticism, Open-Mindedness of Justices After Arguments
Same-Sex Marriage Wins in Historic Supreme Court Ruling
Marriage Ruling Historic, But Not Final Word on Gay Rights
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTopping Kirkland, Weil Won the Most Valuable Major Bankruptcy Retentions of 2024
Changes at the Top: How 'Different Leadership Skills' Are Prevailing in Big Law
Bottoming Out or Merging Up? Law Firms That Shuttered in 2024
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250