The opinion piece also stated that Supreme Court Justice McCaffery, "viewed the matter as a civil rights issue."Another report, in the Philadelphia Gay News, quotes Justice McCaffery as saying, "[I] spoke with my colleagues [and we came] to a unanimous decision that this was an equal-rights issue that needed to be addressed immediately.” (emphasis added).
Civil rights? An equal-rights issue? A unanimous decision!? Now, I don't want to read too much into the Justice's comments and I have no idea who the "colleagues" are that reached a unanimous verdict... errr decision... but could we be getting a glimpse into the high court's view of same sex unions?
The Philadelphia Gay News cites a court spokesman as stating that the "policy will apply only to same-sex partners of the employees and will not be offered to unmarried heterosexual couples." Pennsylvania does not currently recognize same sex unions or marriages so such a requirement would defeat the purpose. It is interesting, however, that similarly situated, unmarried, heterosexual couples will not receive these benefits.