In Montana, of all places...

This is certainly some good news...

Montana's public universities must provide their gay employees with insurance coverage for their domestic partners, the state's Supreme Court ruled yesterday.

The majority in the 4-to-3 decision said the decision had nothing to do with the rights of gay couples to marry.

Of course, you will have this:

But a dissenting judge criticized his colleagues as "radically altering common law marriage in Montana."

I tend to disagree, unless common marriage laws in Montana specifically state "man and woman." But even if it does, who cares? The violation of rights is the trump card here. Besides, nationwide concensus is at about 50% for civil unions, and I believe it is even higher if you phrase it more innocuously (e.g. get same benefits but no recognition of marriage (I admit I don't know what the polls say in the state of Montana).

Anyway, it's nice to see another step forward being taken...