News
Wisconsin latest state to face marriage lawsuit
‘Evasion’ statute prohibits couples from going elsewhere to wed

Charvonne Kemp (left) and Marie Carlson filed a lawsuit in Wisconsin seeking marriage rights. (Photo courtesy of the American Civil Liberties Union)
Same-sex couples in Wisconsin joined others throughout the country on Monday in filing a lawsuit seeking same-sex marriage, but efforts there are unique because of the penalties for marrying in another jurisdiction.
The litigation seeks not only to overturn the state’s 2006 constitutional amendment barring same-sex marriage, but also to enjoin state official from enforcing a “marriage evasion law” prohibiting couples — gay and straight — from going elsewhere to marry if the marriage would be prohibited in the state.
The penalties of violating the marriage evasion law in Wisconsin, which is the only state to have such a statute, include up to $10,000 in fines and nine months in prison.
For Marie Carlson, one-half of one of the couples participating in the lawsuit, the marriage evasion law is of concern as she seeks recognition of her relationship with Charvonne Kemp.
“It’s illegal in the state Wisconsin to go another state and get married if you live here,” Carlson said. “I know that it’s not really all that enforced; it’s still something that hangs over your head.”
The marriage evasion law is particularly problematic for same-sex couples in Wisconsin because the Obama administration in most cases has elected to recognize same-sex marriages even if the state doesn’t recognize them — provided these couples are able to marry in a jurisdiction that allows it.
John Knight, a staff attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union’s LGBT project, called the marriage evasion law a “Catch-22” for same-sex couples living in Wisconsin who want to marry.
“Wisconsin is unique in that sense, and so we think that argument particularly exemplifies the harm or the animus toward same-sex couples in some parts of the country,” Knight said.
But for Kemp, it’s not the fear of prosecution for marrying elsewhere that compels her to seek the right marry in Wisconsin, but the ability to wed in the state where she’s lived with her partner for seven years and raised two sons.
“We’re completely in love, and we’d like to be married in the state that we live in,” Kemp said. “We do have options where we could obviously leave the state and go to other states and get married, but we want to be legally recognized where we live.”
The lawsuit, Wolf and Schumacher v. Walker, was filed by the ACLU, the ACLU of Wisconsin and Mayer Brown LLP and is pending before the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin.
Like other lawsuits filed throughout the country, the 29-page complaint filed by the groups in Wisconsin alleges the state’s ban on same-sex marriage violates equal protection and due process under the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
“Although Wisconsin and this country have taken some steps to reduce discrimination against lesbians and gays, Wisconsin’s ban on marriage for same-sex couples is a striking and continuing vestige of the long history of discrimination toward lesbians and gay men,” the complaint says.
The lawsuit was filed on behalf of four same-sex couples seeking to marry in Wisconsin. Along with Kemp and Carlson, who reside in Milwaukee, they are: Virginia Wolf and Carol Schumacher, who reside in Eau Claire, Wis.; Roy Badger and Garth Wangemann, who live in Milwaukee; and Judith “Judi” Trampf and Katharina “Katy” Heyning, who live in Madison.
Although Wisconsin offers same-sex couples the ability to join in a domestic partnership, enacted in the state in 2009, they don’t offer same the legal rights as marriages.
Carlson said the union isn’t enough because that union provides little assistance beyond certain health insurance benefits — and that’s only if the insurance company recognizes the partnership.
“It also goes along with the fact that last like year, Charvonne’s mother passed away, and we all had to go to New Jersey for a week,” Carlson said. “I had to use vacation time because…the company I work for didn’t recognize she was legally my partner, so I didn’t get bereavement to be able to go. So, I had to use a week of my vacation.”
The office of Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R) didn’t immediately respond to the Washington Blade’s request to comment on the lawsuit.
Wisconsin Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen, however, pledged in a statement to the Blade that he would the defend the marriage amendment.
“This constitutional amendment was approved by a large majority of Wisconsin residents,” Van Hollen said. “I believe the amendment is constitutional, and I will vigorously defend it.”
The Wisconsin litigation is among 40 pending lawsuits in 22 states throughout the country seeking marriage rights for gay couples.
Amid expectations that one will soon reach the U.S. Supreme Court for a final ruling on marriage equality, Knight said it’s possible, but he wouldn’t bet on it.
“It’s one of the possibilities it might go to the Supreme Court, but the chance of that in light of all the other cases out there is probably fairly small,” Knight said. “But it could be.”
Nonetheless, if Walker continues to fight the lawsuit and a high court ruling doesn’t happen before the case is resolved, Kemp said she’s willing to take her case to the Supreme Court to fight for marriage rights across the country if necessary.
“I’m willing to go to the Supreme Court to fight for the right for everyone to be able to get married if that’s what they choose to do,” Kemp said. “It’s about marriage equality for all, not marriage equality for some, or for just us.”
For Kemp, the ability to marry in Wisconsin is not just about the legal rights that marriage would afford, but the dignity of having the access to the same union as other couples.
“However, I want to be married just like everyone else. I want it to be legal, not just for if one of us should get sick and having rights where we’re in the hospital with the other one, but also taxes, all the things that come with marriage, good and bad,” Kemp said.
Switzerland
Swiss government backs nationwide conversion therapy ban
Several cantons have already prohibited widely discredited practice
The Swiss government has said it supports a nationwide ban on so-called conversion therapy.
The Swiss Broadcasting Corporation on its website notes the government officially announced its position in a report it published on Wednesday.
Neuchâtel in 2023 became the first Swiss canton to ban conversion therapy.
Lawmakers in Valais and Vaud have also prohibited the widely discredited practice in their respective cantons. Bern and Geneva are among the other cantons in which lawmakers have considered similar prohibitions.
The European Commission earlier this year said all European Union countries should ban conversion therapy.
Switzerland is not a member of the EU, but lawmakers in neighboring Germany in 2020 passed a law that prohibits conversion therapy for minors and for adults who have not consented to undergoing the widely discredited practice.
Several EU countries — Belgium, Cyprus, France, Malta, Norway, Portugal, and Spain — have banned conversion therapy outright.
The Dutch Senate in June approved a bill that would ban conversion therapy in the Netherlands. The lower house of the country’s parliament approved the measure in September 2025.
Greece in 2022 banned conversion therapy for minors.
2026 Midterm Elections
Markey’s primary win deemed success for LGBTQ activists
Mass. lawmaker champions transgender rights
U.S. Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) clinched the Democratic seat for his reelection campaign in Massachusetts’s primary election on Tuesday.
Markey won the deep-blue state with 64.8 percent of the vote, according to NBC News, triumphing over Marine Corps combat veteran and Congressman Seth Moulton, who received 35.2 percent of the vote.
Massachusetts’s primary election, which determined which Democratic candidate will head to the polls to face off against the Republican challenger in November, is being considered a victory for LGBTQ-inclusive policy, as well as for a divisive pro-transgender rights candidate — both things Markey has become an outspoken champion of.
Markey has experience at multiple levels of government, from the state level, where he served three terms in the state House of Representatives, to his federal tenure, including 20 terms in the U.S. House of Representatives and is now serving his second term as a senator. He has become a fixture of a changing Democratic Party in one of the most consistently blue places in the U.S.
This primary — and much of the national discussion surrounding the Senate seat — focused a lot of campaigning power on fighting the growing sentiment, led mostly by Republicans, that the frustration many Americans feel lends itself to an anti-establishment and anti-incumbent attitude.
Markey ran his campaign using his past as a reflection of his commitment to constantly putting his best foot forward for Bay Staters — particularly with apprehension for issues younger and more progressive democrats have been righting for — including Green New Deal and “Medicare for All” while Moulton — who was also elected to federal office prior to this run — campaigned on being younger than Markey, arguing that he was not the same type of established politician.
Moulton also faced backlash for negative comments about trans athletes, sparking criticism for those who did want younger candidate but want for trans rights to be protected.
Markey’s track record of supporting the LGBTQ community is one of the most clear in federal politics, one that has garnered a “100 percent lifetime voting record” on the Human Rights Campaign’s PAC politician review scorecard.
That list of Markey’s actions includes being a cosponsor of the Equality Act, driving landmark legislation to ensure federal protections for LGBTQ Americans, and being one of the most vocal proponents for trans rights in the federal government — specifically in multiple appropriations bills and in the National Defense Authorization Act. He was also the lead sponsor of the Transgender Health Care Access Act and the Transgender Bill of Rights resolution.
Markey first introduced the Transgender Bill of Rights in the Senate in 2023, where it ultimately failed to be brought to law. He reintroduced the legislation this year once again. This was a direct response to the attitude pushed by many conservatives after 2021, when the push to minimize trans rights started to become a key part of their cause and has been constantly propped up by the Trump-Vance administration.
“Massachusetts needs a senator who stands up and fights back, a senator who never forgets who they are fighting for,” Markey said during his victory speech. “That has been the mission of my life, and it always will be.”
Following the calling of the primary, a slew of LGBTQ organizations rallied behind Markey, many pushing his past as an asset that puts his money where his mouth is through advocating for legislation specifically protecting the LGBTQ community.
Tyler Hack, the executive director of the Christopher Street Project, an organization dedicated to pushing for legal protections for trans americans, released a statement following Markey’s win. Hack argued that putting forward such a staunchly pro-trans candidate is a win for the community, especially after endorsing him earlier this year.
“Tonight, anti-trans politics lost. Massachusetts rejected the idea that attacking transgender people is a shortcut to political power. Voters chose a different path: one where equality is not negotiable, cruelty is not courage, and transgender people do not have to disappear for Democrats to succeed.”
The Human Rights Campaign also endorsed him as a candidate earlier this year and issued a statement via its president, Kelley Robinson.
“Ed Markey has spent decades fighting for LGBTQ+ equality, for working people, and for a more livable world,” Robinson said. “He knows why equality matters. He’s stood with us no matter what. We were proud to endorse him this year, and when a pro-equality majority takes back the Senate this fall, we will continue to count on him as a champion for our community.”
Markey is running for reelection against Republican John Deaton in November, where he is expected to win.
Bulgaria
Top Bulgarian court rules government must legally recognize trans people
Decision caps off decade-long legal fight
Bulgaria’s top court has ruled the country’s government must allow transgender people to legally change their name and gender on ID documents.
A trans woman from Bulgaria who moved to Italy, had tried to change her gender and name on her Bulgarian ID documents, but courts in the country denied her requests for nearly a decade.
The Bulgarian Supreme Court of Cassation in a 2023 ruling essentially banned trans people from legally changing their name and gender on ID documents.
The EU Court of Justice in Luxembourg, which is the European Union’s highest court, in March ruled in the “Shipova” case that member states must allow trans people to legally change their name and gender on ID documents. The lead plaintiff in the “Shipova” case is among the four litigants in the Bulgarian Supreme Court of Cassation case.
Two Bulgarian advocacy groups — Bilitis and Deystvie — along with TGEU – Trans Europe and Central Asia and ILGA-Europe in a joint statement they issued on Tuesday noted the Bulgarian Supreme Court of Cassation’s July 22 decision “aligns Bulgarian practice with the Court of Justice of the EU, enabling changes to gender markers, names, and personal identification numbers.”
“The judges also concluded that EU law requires Bulgaria to establish a legal procedure for legal gender recognition, which is necessary so that Bulgarian trans citizens can travel and reside freely inside the EU,” they added.
Bulgaria has been a member of the EU since 2007.
The country borders Romania, Serbia, North Macedonia, Greece, and Turkey.
“We are very glad to see that the judges of the Supreme Court clearly stated that it is actually a matter of rule of law for Bulgaria to respect the universal equality and the dignity of all human beings, including trans people for whom human rights-based legal gender recognition procedures are an indispensable element,” said Denitsa Lyubenova, co-chair of Deystvie who represented the four plaintiffs in the Bulgarian courts and the lead litigant in the “Shipova” case at the EU Court of Justice. “The government needs to act swiftly now to put in place an LGR procedure that is fully in line with European human rights case law, which means without any conditions requiring proof of medical, surgical or hormonal treatment.”
The groups also urged the Bulgarian government to codify the ruling into law.
“While lower courts are expected to follow this ruling directly, a court decision is not a substitute for law,” they said. “Bulgaria still needs a fast, transparent, and accessible legal gender recognition procedure written into legislation, not left to case-by-case court precedent. TGEU – Trans Europe and Central Asia, Bilitis, Deystvie, and ILGA-Europe call on the Bulgarian government to start that legislative process now, with meaningful involvement from civil society.”
-
Theater5 days agoImmersive ‘Nation-State’ imagines a society free of authoritarianism
-
Poland4 days agoPoland begins to legally recognize same-sex marriages from other countries
-
Congress4 days agoHRC president campaigns for Chris Pappas in NH
-
Advice4 days agoWe’re getting married but our parents object
