 After enactment of the amendment (known as Proposal 2), Michigan governor Jennifer Granholm questioned the legality of providing state-funded domestic partnership benefits.In May 2005, Pride at Work, on behalf of its members at Michigan State University and other state agencies, filed a complaint seeking to establish that the amendment does not bar public employers from providing benefits to domestic partners.Pride at Work argued in its brief that domestic partnership benefits are a contractual relationship unrelated to marital status and are not preempted by the amendment.