|
This
is a ruling on a motion to dismiss a suit brought by the lesbian
partner of a parent whose child had been committed to the Department
of Children and Families. The plaintiff brought an action for damages
under § 1983. She alleged that the defendants, all of whom were
employees of the Department of Children and Families, violated her
right to family integrity and association and deprived her of equal
protection of the laws. The issues include “1) whether the complaint
states a claim for violation of the Fourteenth Amendment right to
family integrity based on an adult's strong emotional relationship
with the unrelated, non-adopted child of her partner; [and] (2)
whether the complaint alleges facts sufficient to state and equal
protection claim where employees of a state agency administered
internal agency policies in a discriminatory manner based on sexual
orientation; and if so, whether the state employees' unequal implementation
of those policies can said to have violated clearly established
law . . .”
The court
held that even if the plaintiff could prove that she had an “intimate
and committed relationship” with the child, the link between the
child and the plaintiff would not be sufficient to implicate the
fundamental right to family integrity. The court held that because
the law suit alleged no fundamental right, the defendants were entitled
to qualified immunity with respect to this claim . The court determined
that until the state has the opportunity to provide a rational basis
for treating the lesbian couple differently, it is an open question
whether the defendants have violated the plaintiff's rights to equal
protection of the laws. Because it is well-settled that a government
classification that is not rationally related to a legitimate state
interest violates equal protection principles, the court held that
the defendants were not entitled to qualified immunity with respect
to this claim.
|
