Connecticut LGBT Laws

Assisted Reproduction Technology
Artificial Insemination, In Vitro Fertilisation
Surrogacy
Legislation/Cases/References
See also: [PARENTING]
1. Courts & Tribunals

On 07 January 2011, the Connecticut Supreme Court ruled that Shawn Raftopol, 40, has parenting rights, even though he is not the biological father, because the couple had a valid surrogacy agreement. The couple married legally in Massachusetts in 2008. Their twins, Sebastiann and Lukas, now 2, were born in Connecticut through in-vitro fertilization with a donor egg and a surrogate mother [C1.3], [C1.2], [R1.1]

C1.3 Connecticut Supreme Court: Anthony Raftopol et al v. Karma A Ramey et al (SC 18482) – Majority Opinion PDF 182.35kb, 05 JAN 11
C1.2 Connecticut Supreme Court: Raftopol v. Ramey (SC 18482) – Concurrence PDF 116.0kb, 05 JAN 11
R1.1 ABC News Radio: Surrogacy Law: Connecticut Gives Non-Genetic Parents Legal Rights 20 JAN 11
Civil Unions, Partners (Domestic, Registered) Legislation/Cases/References
1. State

On 01 October 2010, all existing civil unions were automatically transformed into marriages no new civil unions being allowed after 30 September 2010 [R1.6].

In April 2005, Connecticut became the first state to approve civil unions without being forced by the courts [L1.5], [R1.4].

Previously

On 07 May 2002, the Senate approved a bill 30-6 to extend limited legal rights to same-sex couples [R1.3].

The law allows individuals to make medical decisions for their partners, such as when to withdraw life support. It also grants private visitation rights for same-sex couples in nursing homes and allows an individual to file wrongful death claims in the case of the murder of his or her partner [R1.3].

On 03 June 2002, Governor Rowland signed the Bill, which does not specifically refer to same-sex couples. The provisions came into effect 01 October 2002 [R1.2].

In April 2002, legislation granting limited rights to gay and lesbian couples was introduced in the Connecticut legislature [R1.1].

2. Cities & Towns

In October 2002, Hartford reportedly had a Domestic Partner Registry [R2.1].

3. Courts & Tribunals

On 16 July 2014, the state Supreme Court ruled that Charlotte Stacey, a widow from Middletown, formerly of Norwalk, can sue a doctor for damages in a medical malpractice case for the loss of her spouse Margaret A Mueller’s companionship and income, thus expanding the common-law claim for loss of consortium [C3.5], [R3.4].

In August 2002, State Superior and Appellate court judges ruled they had no jurisdiction to dissolve a civil union because Connecticut does not recognize same-sex unions [R3.3].

A petition was in the State Supreme Court to appeal the decisions [R3.2].


In February 2000, Arbitrator Roberta Golick ruled that the state was required to offer health benefits to employees in same-sex relationships and gave the state 30 days to act [R3.1].

R1.6 GLAD: Connecticut Civil Unions PDF 143.89kb, 08 APR 10
L1.5 General Statutes of Connecticut: Title 46b, Chapter 815f Civil Union (Accessed 29 OCT 09)
R1.4 The Age: California Approves Gay Marriage Bill 07 SEP 05
R1.3 Waterbury Republican American: Senate Vote Gives Limited Rights to Same-sex Couples 08 MAY 02
R1.2 Hartford Courant: Rowland Signs Bills On … Gay Rights 04 JUN 02
R1.1 365Gay.com: Watered Down Partner Bill In Connecticut Legislature 29 APR 02
R2.1 Providence Journal: Vermont’s Civil Unions 13 OCT 02
C3.5 Opinion: Margaret A Mueller v. Isidors Teplar, et al. No SC 18939 PDF 120.40kb, 16 JUL 14
R3.4 TheHour: Connecticut court affirms pre-gay marriage rights 16 JUL 14
R3.3 Associated Press: Connecticut Doesn’t Recognize Civil Union 28 AUG 02
R3.2 Associated Press: State Supreme Court Asked to Take Up Civil Unions Case 28 JUL 02
R3.1 Associated Press: Connecticut Same-Sex Partner Benefits Ruled 01 FEB 00
Discrimination Legislation/Cases/References
See also: [GENDER IDENTITY]
1. State

Title 46a Human Rights, Chapter 814c Human Rights and Opportunities [L1.2]

Sec. 46a-81a – Sec.46a-81n. Sexual orientation discrimination […]

The above Sections make it unlawful to discriminate on the ground of sexual orientation in associations of licensed persons [81b], employment [81c] , public accommodations [81d], housing [81e], credit practices [81f], state practices [81g], equal employment in state agencies [81h], services of state agencies [81i], job recruitment and placement services provided by state agencies [81j], licensing practices of state agencies [81k], educational and vocational programs of state agencies [81m], allocation of state benefits [81n]. Religious organizations are exempt [81p]

“Sexual orientation” means heterosexuality, homosexuality or bisexuality [Section 46a-81a]


In August 2001, discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation in public and private employment was unlawful [R1.1].

2. Courts & Tribunals

On 17 November 2016 US District Judge Warren W Eginton denied a motion for summary judgment of the claim of Lisa Boutillier that Hartford Public Schools discriminated and retaliated against her based on her sexual orientation, ruling that Title VII can be interpreted to ban sexual orientation discrimination, despite prior contrary rulings by the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, under whose jurisdiction his court is [C2.4], [R2.3].

On 18 November 2016, Superior Court Judge Edward Krumeich II denied a motion to dismiss the discrimination lawsuit brought by now former corrections officer Ernesto Velazquez against the state Department of Corrections, alleging discrimination on the basis of his sexual orientation, ruling ”A reasonable jury may conclude the DOC was negligent and the co-workers’ discriminatory conduct would be imputed to the DOC” [R2.2].

In November 2000, the Connecticut Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities ruled that a state law banning sex discrimination covers transgendered people [R2.1].

1. State
L1.2 General Statutes of Connecticut: Chapter 814c Human Rights and Opportunities (Accessed 29 OCT 09)
R1.1 Bloomington Herald-Times: State Adds Gays to Policy on Job Discrimination 07 AUG 01
2. Courts & Tribunals
C2.4 Memorandum of Decision: Boutillier v. Hartford Public Schools No. 3:13-cv-01303-WWE PDF 143.53kb 21 NOV 16
R2.3 GayCityNews: Another Federal Judge: Gay Plaintiff Can Claim Sex Discrimination 08 DEC 16
R2.2 GreenwichTime: Judge upholds discrimination suit against DOC 18 NOV 16
R2.1 The Advocate: Connecticut Commission Says Antibias Law Covers Transgendered People 16 NOV 00
Gender Identity, Intersex,
Transgender, Transexual
[?]
Legislation/Cases/References
1. State

On 14 May 2018, Governor Malloy announced that he had signed Public Act 18-4 – An Act Concerning the Fair Treatment of Incarcerated Persons, that amongst several requirements, establishes standards of treatment and placement for inmates who have a gender identity that differs from their assigned sex at birth with effect from 01 July (Section 8) [R1.9].

On 01 June 2015, the Senate voted 32-3 in favor of bill HB 7006, that would allow any person who has undergone surgical, hormonal or other clinically appropriate treatment for gender transition to change their sex on their birth certificate [R1.8] (upon providing):

(1) A written request from the applicant, signed under penalty of law, for a replacement birth certificate to reflect that the applicant’s gender differs from the sex designated on the original birth certificate; (2) a written statement by a physician, advanced practice registered nurse, or nurse licensed pursuant to chapter 370 or holding a current license in good standing in another state, or psychologist licensed pursuant to chapter 383 or holding a current license in good standing in another state, stating that the applicant has undergone surgical, hormonal or other treatment clinically appropriate for the applicant for the purpose of gender transition; and (3) if an applicant is also requesting a change of name listed on the original birth certificate, proof of a legal name change [L1.7].

On 05 July 2011, Governor Dannel P. Malloy signed HB6599 An Act Concerning Discrimination into law barring discrimination based on gender identity or expression in employment, housing, public accommodations, credit and all other laws under the jurisdiction of the state’s Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities [R1.6], [L1.5].

On 04 June 2011, the Senate passed House Bill 6599: An Act Concerning Discrimination in a 20–16 vote. The House passed the bill in a 77–62 vote last month. Gov. Dannel P. Malloy must now sign the bill before it can become law (effective 01 October 2011), which he has indicated he will do [L1.5], [R1.4].

Previously:

On 05 April 2011, the Judiciary Committee endorsed a bill that would add gender identity and expression to the state’s non-discrimination statutes. Similar bills have been introduced several times since 2006 but have never won passage [R1.3].

On 30 March 2011, the judiciary committee postponed a vote on a controversial bill aiming to provide legal protection for transgender people [R1.2].

In May 2004, Connecticut joined seven other states that protect transgender people in hate crime laws when Republican Gov. John Rowland signed the legislation into law [R1.1].

Connecticut’s hate crime law already enhances the penalties for crimes committed against people or their property due to ethnicity, religion, real or perceived race and sexual orientation. Sexual orientation was added into the law in 1987 [R1.1].

2. Courts & Tribunals

In November 2000, the Connecticut Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities ruled that a state law banning sex discrimination covers transgendered people [R2.1].

R1.9 Press Release: Governor Malloy Signs Legislation Codifying Practices Into Law To Ensure The Fair Treatment Of Women In Prison 14 MAY 18
R1.8 LBGTQnation: Connecticut lawmakers send bill to governor to ease birth certificate changes 01 JUN 15
L1.7 HB 7006: An Act Concerning Birth Certificate Amendments (Accessed 03 JUN 15)
R1.6 Bay Windows: Connecticut governor signs transgender protections into law 06 JUL 11
L1.5 Connecticut General Assembly: House Bill No. 6599: An Act Concerning Discrimination 23 MAY 11
R1.4 WestHartfordPatch: Legislature Approves a Pair of Controversial Bills 04 JUN 11
R1.3 Courant.com: Transgender non-discrimination bill passes Judiciary – without any amendments 05 APR 11
R1.2 The Advocate: Connecticut Transgender Protections Bill on Hold 31 MAR 11`
R1.1 Gay.com: Connecticut Adds Transgender Hate Crime Law 26 MAY 04
R2.1 The Advocate: Connecticut Commission Says Antibias Law Covers Transgendered People 16 NOV 00
Hate Crimes Legislation/Cases/References
See also: [GENDER IDENTITY]
1. State

General Statutes of Connecticut, Title 53a Penal Code, Chapter 952 Penal Code: Offences [L1.3]

Sec. 53a-181j. Intimidation based on bigotry or bias in the first degree: Class C felony.

(a) A person is guilty of intimidation based on bigotry or bias in the first degree when such person maliciously, and with specific intent to intimidate or harass another person because of the actual or perceived race, religion, ethnicity, disability, sexual orientation or gender identity or expression of such other person, causes serious physical injury to such other person or to a third person.

(b) Intimidation based on bigotry or bias in the first degree is a class C felony.

Sec. 53a-181k. Intimidation based on bigotry or bias in the second degree: Class D felony.

(a) A person is guilty of intimidation based on bigotry or bias in the second degree when such person maliciously, and with specific intent to intimidate or harass another person because of the actual or perceived race, religion, ethnicity, disability, sexual orientation or gender identity or expression of such other person, does any of the following: (1) Causes physical contact with such other person, (2) damages, destroys or defaces any real or personal property of such other person, or (3) threatens, by word or act, to do an act described in subdivision (1) or (2) of this subsection, if there is reasonable cause to believe that an act described in subdivision (1) or (2) of this subsection will occur.

(b) Intimidation based on bigotry or bias in the second degree is a class D felony.


In May 2004, Connecticut joined seven other states that protect transgender people in hate crime laws when Republican Gov. John Rowland signed the legislation into law [R1.2].

In 1987, hate crimes based on sexual orientation became an aggravating circumstance [R1.1].

L1.3 General Statutes of Connecticut: Title 53a, Chapter 952 Penal Code (Accessed 29 OCT 09)
R1.2 Gay.com: Connecticut Adds Transgender Hate Crime Law 26 MAY 04
R1.1 ILGA: State-Sponsored Homophobia PDF 382.87kb, MAY 08
Health, Medical Legislation/Cases/Documents/References
1. State

On 02 May 2017, the House of Representatives voted 141 to 8 to pass and send to the Senate a bill that would bar conversion therapy, the discredited practice of trying to change the sexual orientation of young homosexuals. Governor Dannel P Malloy applauded the strong bipartisan vote and promised his signature upon passage by the Senate [R1.3].

On 19 December 2013, the State Insurance Department issued Bulletin 1C-37 informing health insurance companies and like providers that deliver or issue individual and group health insurance policies within the state, that they are now required to cover treatments related to gender transition [D1.2], [R1.1].

2. Courts & Tribunals

On 10 January 2006, Margaret A Mueller and Charlotte Stacey sued for medical malpractice in a cancer misdiagnosis claim. Mueller died in 2009 and on 02 July 2010, her Estate was awarded $2.45M.

On 11 February 2008, the trial judge ruled that Charlotte Stacey could not recover loss of consortium damages because the plaintiffs had not been legally married prior to or during the dates of the alleged negligent acts. The Appellate Court (No. 32489, 27 December 2011) affirmed the trial judge’s ruling [C2.3].

The case is before the Supreme Court, Stacey asserting that she and Mueller would have formalized their relationship if it were not for the unconstitutional deprivation of their right to do so under state law, as it existed at that time [C2.2], [R2.1].

R1.3 CTmirror: Connecticut House votes to bar gay ‘conversion therapy’ 02 MAY 17
D1.2 Connecticut Insurance Department: Gender Identity Nondiscrimination Requirements Bulletin 1C-37 PDF 1.49MB, 20 DEC 13
R1.1 The Advocate: Connecticut Becomes Fifth State to Require Transgender Medical Coverage 31 DEC 13
C2.3 Opinion: Margaret A Mueller v. Isidore Tepler, et al No. 32489, 27 DEC 11
C2.2 Case: Margaret A Mueller v. Isidore Tepler et al SC 18939
21.1 Connecticut Law Tribune: Same-Sex Partner Seeks Loss Of Consortium Damages 27 NOV 13
Homosexuality, Sodomy Legislation/Cases/References
1. National

Consensual sex between same-sex couples became lawful on 01 October 1971 [R1.1].

R1.1 Connecticut Public Acts 1969, Public Act No. 828, enacted 7/8/1969, effective 10/1/1971
Marriage Legislation/Cases/References
1. State

On 12 November 2008, same-sex couples attained the right to marry as a consequence of the decision of the Superior Court in Kerrigan and Mock v. Connecticut Department of Public Health on 10 October 2008 [R2.3].

In May 2004, Connecticut’s marriage laws had reportedly not been analyzed since 1980, when the attorney general’s office ruled that state statutes did not specifically define marriage [L1.5], [R1.4].

Consequently, it is unclear whether same-sex marriages in Massachusetts will be recognised in Connecticut. Connecticut has no statute declaring same-sex marriages void [R1.3].

In January 2003, the Judiciary Committee forwarded to the full General Assembly its review of the same-sex marriage issue, but did not make any specific recommendations [R1.2].

In March 2002, two bills, one to allow so-called civil unions and the other to legalize same-sex marriages, were required to be considered by the legislature’s Judiciary Committee [R1.1]

2. Courts & Tribunals

On 31 July 2012, Judge Vanessa Bryant in the US District Court for the District of Connecticut ruled Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act is discriminatory and violates the US Constitution’s principles of equal protection because it denies federal benefits to same-sex couples who were married in states where such unions are legal [C2.6], [R2.5].

On July 2012, Judge Vanessa Bryant of the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut denied a request from the House Republican-controlled Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group to halt proceedings in Pedersen v. Office of Personnel Management, a challenge to the Defense of Marriage Act [R2.4].

On 10 October 2008, the Connecticut Supreme Court issued a 4–3 decision in favor of eight gay couples who were the plaintiffs in Kerrigan and Mock v. the Connecticut Department of Public Health, effectively legalizing same-sex marriage in the state [R2.3].

Justice Richard Palmer scheduled a hearing for the morning of November 12th to enter the final judgment. It was anticipated that gay and lesbian couples would be able to get marriage licences immediately after the hearing [R2.2].

In December 2008, a Quinnipiac University poll, 52% of voters said they supported the Supreme Court and 39% opposed it, with 9% undecided [R2.1].

L1.5 General Statutes of Connecticut: Title 46b Family Law, Chapter 815e Marriage (Accessed 29 OCT 09)
R1.4 Associated Press: Blumenthal to Respond to Romney Inquiry on Gay Marriage 02 MAY 04
R1.3 Associated Press: Blumenthal Says Gay Marriage Not Permitted in Connecticut 17 MAY 04
R1.2 Associated Press: Committee forwards report on to legislature 06 JAN 03
R1.1 Hamden Journal: Debating Gay Couples’ Rights 13 MAR 02

C2.6 Memorandum of Decision: Joanne Pedersen, et al v. Office of Personnel Management et al 10-cv-1750 (VLB) PDF 283.34kb, 31 JUL 12
R2.5 Bloomberg: Defense of Marriage Act Ruled Unlawful by U.S. Judge 01 AUG 12
R2.4 The Advocate: BLAG Request to Stop DOMA Challenge Denied 05 JUL 12
R2.3 The Advocate: Connecticut Supreme Court Legalizes Gay Marriage 27-29 SEP 08
R2.2 PinkNews.co.uk: Today is gay wedding day in Connecticut as same-sex marriages begin 12 NOV 08
PinkNews.com: Connecticut Gays Can Get Married From November 12th 04 NOV 08
R2.1 PinkNews.co.uk: Connecticut Voters Back Court’s Gay Marriage Decision 17 DEC 08
Military, Veterans Legislation/Cases/References
1. State

On 16 May, the House of Representatives voted 134-0 in favor of legislation (Substitute for SB 70) making veterans eligible for state benefits if they have been denied federal benefits solely because of their sexual orientation. The veteran’s federal benefits must have also been reinstated. The Bill was sent to the Governor [R1.2].

On 24 April 2013, the Senate voted 34-0 in favour of legislation which would make veterans who have been denied federal benefits based on their sexual orientation, eligible for state benefits. They must also have had their federal benefits reinstated. The bill will now move to the Connecticut House [R1.1].

R1.2 SFGN: Benefits for Gay Vets Bill Moves to Connecticut Governor 16 MAY 13
R1.1 PinkNews: Connecticut Senate votes to restore benefits to veterans denied them under ‘Don’t Ask Don’t Tell’ 25 APR 13
Parenting: Adoption, Fostering Legislation/Cases/References
1. State

The state’s adoption law allows gay couples to jointly adopt using the same process as married couples [R1.5].

Second-parent adoption is also lawful in Connecticut [R1.4]

Previously –

In May 2000, the state’s Senate gave final legislative approval to the bill that would allow gays and other unmarried people to adopt their partners’ children. Gov. John G. Rowland said he would sign the bill into law [R1.3].

In March 2000, the bill that would allow gays and other unmarried people to adopt their partners’ children was making its way through the General Assembly for a second time [R1.2].


Connecticut General Assembly, Title 45a Probate Courts & Procedure, Chapter 803 Termination of Parental Rights and Adoption [L1.1]

Sec. 45a-726a. Consideration of sexual orientation of prospective adoptive or foster parent. Notwithstanding any provision of sections 4a-60a and 46a-81a to 46a-81p, inclusive, the Commissioner of Children and Families or a child-placing agency may consider the sexual orientation of the prospective adoptive or foster parent or parents when placing a child for adoption or in foster care. Nothing in this section shall be deemed to require the Commissioner of Children and Families or a child-placing agency to place a child for adoption or in foster care with a prospective adoptive or foster parent or parents who are homosexual or bisexual.

2. Courts & Tribunals

On 07 January 2011, the Connecticut Supreme Court ruled that Shawn Raftopol, 40, has parenting rights (including being named on the child’s birth certificate), even though he is not the biological father, because the couple had a valid surrogacy agreement. The couple married legally in Massachusetts in 2008. Their twins, Sebastiann and Lukas, now 2, were born in Connecticut through in-vitro fertilization with a donor egg and a surrogate mother [C2.4], [C2.3], [R2.2]

In January 1999, the state Supreme Court ruled that the state’s adoption laws did not permit the adoption of a 6-year-old Ledyard boy by his biological mother’s lesbian partner [R2.1].

R1.5 Washington Post: Gay Couples and Adoption 24 JUL 01
R1.4 Chicago Tribune: Same-Sex and Parents Too 23 JUN 02
R1.3 Associated Press: Senate Gives Final Approval to Gay Adoption Bill 03 MAY 00
R1.2 MSNBC: Bill Passes Allowing Gays, Unmarrieds to Adopt Partners’ Children 17 MAR 00
L1.1 General Statutes of Connecticut: Title 45a, Chapter 803, Sec. 45a-726a (Accessed 29 OCT 09)
C2.4 Connecticut Supreme Court: Anthony Raftopol et al v. Karma A Ramey et al (SC 18482) – Majority Opinion PDF 182.35kb, 05 JAN 11
C2.3 Connecticut Supreme Court: Raftopol v. Ramey (SC 18482) – Concurrence PDF 116.0kb, 05 JAN 11
R2.2 ABC News Radio: Surrogacy Law: Connecticut Gives Non-Genetic Parents Legal Rights 20 JAN 11
R2.1 Newsday: Supreme Court Rules Against Lesbian Adoption 16 JAN 99
Negligence, Wrongful Death Legislation/Cases/References
1. State

On 07 May 2002, the Senate approved a bill 30-6 to extend limited legal rights to same-sex couples [R1.1].

The law will allow an individual to file wrongful death claims in the case of the murder of his or her partner [R1.1].

2. Courts & Tribunals

On 16 July 2014, the state Supreme Court ruled that Charlotte Stacey, a widow from Middletown, formerly of Norwalk, can sue a doctor for damages in a medical malpractice case for the loss of her spouse Margaret A Mueller’s companionship and income, thus expanding the common-law claim for loss of consortium [C2.2], [R2.1].

R1.1 Waterbury Republican American: Senate Vote Gives Limited Rights to Same-sex Couples 08 MAY 02
C2.2 Opinion: Margaret A Mueller v. Isidors Teplar, et al. No SC 18939 PDF 120.40kb, 16 JUL 14
R2.1 TheHour: Connecticut court affirms pre-gay marriage rights 16 JUL 14