To An Extent, A Good Decision

A California Court of Appeal has thrown out a case filed by a man who claimed that unmarried/cohabitating couples of the opposite sex should have the same right to file a wrongful death lawsuit as cohabitating same-sex couples.

Jack Holguin said the law's exclusion of unmarried heterosexual couples violates his equal protection rights. Holguin's girlfriend, Tamara Booth, was killed in a car accident. They had lived together for three years, but never married.

The Los Angeles County trial judge dismissed the complaint, and the 1st District affirmed, holding that the state Legislature had "rational bases" for not extending partnership benefits to "cohabiting unmarried couples in general."

Although I understand the illogic of the law that the plaintiff in this matter was trying to expose and eliminate, I think the decision by the Court of Appeal was proper for two reasons: 1) an equal protection violation ruling would have resulted in sexual orientation being given the equivalent status of race, sex and ethnicity (all of which are constitutionally protected classifications); and 2) cohabitation by unmarried couples of the opposite sex would have been legally endorsed (i.e., "blessed").