The nation's largest private employer is being sued for alleged discrimination against same-sex couples.

A Massachusetts lesbian couple on Tuesday announced the lawsuit against Wal-Mart, and they're asking a judge to certify it as a class-action to allow them to represent others.

Jaqueline Cote and Diana Smithson say Wal-Mart's pre-2014 policy of denying benefits to same-sex couples – unless required by state law – cost them at least $150,000 in medical bills.

The couple formerly worked together at Wal-Mart and married in 2004, when Massachusetts became the first state to allow same-sex marriage. They tried unsuccessfully to enroll Smithson in Wal-Mart's spousal health insurance coverage from 2008, when she left the company to care for Cote's mother.

Smithson developed ovarian cancer in 2012, and the couple is seeking to recoup costs incurred through Jan. 1, 2014, when the company expanded coverage to all married and unmarried couples.



The couple's struggle long has attracted media attention. In January, the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission determined Wal-Mart's denial of insurance "constituted discrimination on the basis of her sex," because Smithson would have been covered if Cote was male.

In May, the lawsuit says, the EEOC issued a "right to sue" letter authorizing a lawsuit under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, which prohibits employers from discriminating on the basis of sex. Federal law does not ban employment discrimination based on sexual orientation.

The couple's backers, advocacy groups Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders (GLAD) and the Washington Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights and Urban Affairs (WLC), describe the case as the first class-action on behalf of gay employees since the Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriage nationwide last month.

"Wal-Mart broke federal law when it denied vital benefits to workers who have same-sex spouses," said Peter Romer-Friedman, the WLC's deputy director of litigation. "In an era where marriage equality is supported by the American people and the U.S. Supreme Court, it is hard to believe that Wal-Mart would treat its LGBTQ workers so poorly."



The company, which employs 1.3 million people in the U.S., says it fully complied with federal and state law.

Before 2014, the company provided health insurance to same-sex couples in places where state law required it, including California, Hawaii, Maryland, New York, Oregon, Washington state and the nation's capital, says Brian Nick, Wal-Mart's director of national media relations.

The company's current policy allowing benefits for partners of all employees who are married or in committed relationships was made after the Supreme Court in 2013 struck down a section of the Defense of Marriage Act that prevented same-sex couples from receiving federal benefits.

Nick declined to comment directly on the lawsuit.

"Out of respect for Ms. Cote we are not going to comment other than to say our benefits coverage previous to the 2014 update was consistent with the law," he tells U.S. News in an emailed statement.

The lawsuit seeks punitive damages and attorney fees in addition to compensation, and alleges Wal-Mart also violated Massachusetts state law.