State of Alaska and Municipality of Anchorage, Appellants v. Julie A. Schmidt, Gayle Schuh, Julie M. Vollick, Susan…

Summary

The court held that Alaska's senior-citizen and disabled-veteran property-tax exemption facially discriminated against committed same-sex couples because they could not marry and thereby obtain the exemption's full benefit on the same terms as opposite-sex couples. Applying minimum scrutiny, the court concluded that the asserted interests in cost control, administrative efficiency, and promoting marriage did not bear a fair and substantial relationship to the classification. The court rejected one couple's claim because the eligible senior citizen had no ownership interest in the residence, and it vacated the attorney's-fee award for inadequate findings. Justice Winfree, concurring, agreed with the result but questioned whether the two co-owning couples might have qualified for the full exemption under a different interpretation of undivided possession.