Same-sex marriage has been legally recognized in Wisconsin since October 6, 2014, upon the resolution of a lawsuit challenging the state's ban on same-sex marriage. On October 6, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal of an appellate court ruling in Wolf v. Walker that had found Wisconsin's ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional. The appellate court issued its order prohibiting enforcement of the state's ban on same-sex marriage the next day, and counties began issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples immediately. Polling suggests that a majority of Wisconsin residents support the legal recognition of same-sex marriage, with a 2022 poll showing that 72% of respondents supported same-sex marriage. Wisconsin had previously recognized domestic partnerships, which afforded limited legal rights to same-sex couples, from August 2009 until they were discontinued in April 2018.
The Constitution of Wisconsin had precluded state recognition of same-sex marriages and prohibited the establishment of any similar legal status under another name since 2006, when 59% of voters ratified a constitutional amendment defining marriage so as to exclude same-sex couples. A federal lawsuit filed in February 2014, Wolf v. Walker, challenged Wisconsin's refusal to grant marriage licenses to same-sex couples, its refusal to recognize same-sex marriages established in other jurisdictions, and related statutes. In June 2014, Judge Barbara Brandriff Crabb of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin ruled for the plaintiffs and in the week before she stayed her decision county clerks in 60 of the state's 72 counties issued marriage licenses to same-sex couples and some performed marriage ceremonies for them. The state appealed her decision to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, which affirmed it on September 4 but later stayed implementation of its ruling until the U.S. Supreme Court decided whether to consider the case.
Domestic partnerships
Domestic partnerships in Wisconsin afforded limited rights to same-sex couples. A domestic partnership law took effect on August 3, 2009, and provided select rights, such as the ability to inherit a partner's estate in the absence of a will, hospital and jail visitation, and the ability to access family medical leave to care for a sick partner.The Latest: Panel Votes to End Domestic Partner RegistryDomestic Partnership The law was upheld by the Wisconsin Supreme Court in Appling v. Walker on July 31, 2014. Domestic partnerships were discontinued on April 1, 2018 following the legalization of same-sex marriage in Wisconsin.
By June 2017, about 4,400 couples had registered a domestic partnership in Wisconsin, with 78% of these being opposite-sex couples.
Legal restrictions
Statutes Prior to July 20, 1979, same-sex marriage was neither recognized nor prohibited in Wisconsin. In 1979, the Wisconsin Senate and State Assembly passed a bill that defined marriage as "a civil contract, to which the consent of the parties capable in law of contracting is essential, and which creates the legal status of husband and wife." The bill was signed into law by Governor Lee S. Dreyfus, and took effect on July 20, 1979. A bill that the Family Research Institute (FRI) called a "statutory endorsement of traditional marriage" was proposed in the Wisconsin Legislature in 1997, one year after passage of the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA; ), which banned federal recognition of same-sex marriages. The proposal passed the Assembly on a 78–20 vote, but the Senate took no action before adjourning sine die. Legislation in support of same-sex marriage was also proposed that year, but was not voted on by either chamber.
A bill banning same-sex marriage was introduced to the Assembly on August 17, 2003,AB475 The Proposed Legislation and approved on a vote of 68–29 on October 23.AV0303 The Passed House The Senate passed the bill by a vote of 22–10 on November 5.SV0332 The Passed Senate Governor Jim Doyle vetoed the legislation on November 10,AB 475 - Vetoed in Full Vetoed and the Assembly failed to override Doyle's veto by one vote, 63–33, on November 12.Assembly fails to override anti-gay-marriage bill Override Attempt Wisconsin also has a marriage evasion law, which established criminal penalties of up to nine months' imprisonment and a fine up to $10,000 for leaving the state to contract a marriage that would not be valid in the state. According to a spokesperson for Lambda Legal in 2008, several states had similar laws, but Wisconsin's provided the harshest penalties. The applicability of the law to same-sex marriages was disputed, since it was designed to prevent fraud on the part of someone too young to marry legally in Wisconsin.
A bill to repeal the statutory ban on same-sex marriage and incorporate gender-neutral language throughout Wisconsin statutes was rejected by the Assembly in March 2026.
Constitution On March 5, 2004, the Assembly approved a state constitutional amendment by a vote of 68–27, that read:Assembly Joint Resolution 66, Journal of the Wisconsin Assembly, March 5, 2004, p. 798.
The Senate approved the same language by a 20–13 vote on March 12, completing the first of two legislative approvals required to place the amendment on the ballot.Assembly Joint Resolution 66, Journal of the Wisconsin Senate, March 11, 2004, p. 717. The final vote was taken shortly after midnight on March 12. The Senate approved the proposed amendment again on December 6, 2005, voting 19–14 along party lines.Senate Joint Resolution 53, Journal of the Wisconsin Senate, Dec. 6, 2005, p. 488. The Assembly did the same on February 28, 2006, by a vote of 62–31. The question appeared as a referendum on the statewide ballot for the 2006 general election on November 7, 2006,Senate Joint Resolution 53, Journal of the Wisconsin Assembly, Feb. 28, 2006, p. 862 and voters approved the amendment by a margin of 59.4% to 40.6%.Canvass Summary, Wisconsin State Elections Board, Fall General Election, November 7, 2006.
In December 2023, senators Tim Carpenter and Mark Spreitzer announced their intention to file a constitutional amendment to repeal the ban and make appropriate changes in statutory law. "One of the worst days in the Legislature was when that constitutional amendment passed in 2006, and some of my colleagues came up to me afterwards and said, 'Don't take it personal'. It's been personal, and it's been in our constitution for about 17 years and it's time to repeal it. It's time to pass a constitutional amendment that brings back a person's civil rights", said Carpenter. A similar measure was introduced in June 2025, though was rejected by the Assembly in March 2026.
Lawsuits
State lawsuits McConkey v. Van Hollen William McConkey, a political science instructor, filed a lawsuit, McConkey v. Van Hollen, on April 9, 2009, with the Wisconsin Supreme Court, charging that the 2006 referendum which banned both same-sex marriage and civil unions in the state, violated the State Constitution because it proposed more than one question in a single ballot proposal, which is illegal under Wisconsin law. On May 14, the court agreed to hear the case, specifying two questions, whether McConkey, as an individual voter, had standing to sue and whether the ballot initiative presented two questions. Attorney General J. B. Van Hollen challenged McConkey's standing."Supreme Court accepts four new cases", Headlines Archive, Wisconsin Court System, May 21, 2009. The court heard oral arguments on November 3. On June 30, 2010, the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled 7–0 in McConkey that the ballot measure was proper.
Halopka-Ivery v. Walker On April 16, 2014, a lesbian couple married in California sought original jurisdiction in the Wisconsin Supreme Court. They claimed the state's "parallel civil marriage and domestic partnership structure" denied them access to federal benefits. They also challenged Wisconsin's statute imposing criminal penalties on residents who contracted in other jurisdictions a marriage that was not recognized by the state. On May 27, 2014, the Wisconsin Supreme Court, on a 5–2 vote, declined to hear the case.
Federal lawsuits Burkett v. Zablocki In 1971, Donna Burkett and Manonia Evans, an African American lesbian couple from Milwaukee, filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin against the Milwaukee County Clerk, Thomas Zablocki, for refusing to issue them a marriage license. The couple sought "an order compelling the clerk of Milwaukee County to issue them an application for a marriage license." Zablocki moved to dismiss the suit. The plaintiffs failed to submit timely briefs in response to the clerk's motion, and the court dismissed the case in 1972.
Wolf v. Walker
On February 3, 2014, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the law firm Mayer Brown filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin on behalf of four same-sex couples, including a lesbian couple married in Minnesota in 2013. It challenged the State Constitution's denial of marriage rights to same-sex couples and the state statute that provided criminal penalties for leaving the state to establish a marriage that was not valid in Wisconsin. The suit named Governor Scott Walker, several state officials, and two county clerks as defendants. The case was assigned to U.S. District Judge Barbara Brandriff Crabb, who ruled on June 6, 2014 that the state's constitutional and statutory restrictions on same-sex marriage interfered with the fundamental right to marry, violating the Due Process Clause of the U.S. Constitution, and discriminated on the basis of sexual orientation, violating the Equal Protection Clause.Wolf v. Walker, 14-cv-64-bbc, (W.D. Michigan June 6, 2014) p 3 In response to the decision, though Crabb had yet to issue any order enforcing it, county clerks in increasing numbers began issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples and in some cases performing marriage ceremonies for them. Renee Currie and Shari Roll were the first couple to be issued a license in Madison, and were married minutes later just a few blocks away from the Wisconsin State Capitol. The Milwaukee County Executive, Chris Abele, said he would keep the courthouse open until 9 p.m. so same-sex couples could be issued marriage licenses. On June 13, after a week of legal maneuvering and a threat of legal action against the clerks on the part of Attorney General J. B. Van Hollen, Crabb stayed enforcement of her decision while expressing disappointment that recent action by the U.S. Supreme Court in the Utah case of Kitchen v. Herbert compelled her to do so.
On July 10, the state appealed the decision to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, which combined the case for briefing with a similar Indiana case, Baskin v. Bogan, and scheduled oral arguments for August 26. On September 4, the Seventh Circuit, in a unanimous opinion authored by Judge Richard Posner, upheld the district court decision. Posner wrote:
On September 9, Van Hollen asked the U.S. Supreme Court to consider the case. The Seventh Circuit stayed enforcement of its ruling on September 18. On October 6, 2014, the Supreme Court denied review of this case, allowing the Seventh Circuit's ruling to take effect. Van Hollen responded by stating, "the Seventh Circuit affirmed the District Court's decision holding Wisconsin's Marriage Protection Amendment unconstitutional, and the Supreme Court has declined the opportunity to examine that decision. It is now our obligation to comply with those court decisions." Governor Walker also instructed county clerks to comply and issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples.October 6 2014 - Wisconsin Department of Justice - Office of the Attorney-General Same-sex couples began marrying in Wisconsin the following day, Tuesday, October 7, 2014, after the Seventh Circuit and the District Court issued their mandates.
Obergefell v. Hodges