W Post Supreme Court strikes down key part of Defense of Marriage Act By _Robert Barnes_ (http://www.washingtonpost.com/robert-barnes/2011/05/20/AFZRhx7G_page.html)
< The Supreme Court on Wednesday struck down as unconstitutional a key part of _the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act_ (http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-03-27/politics/38050662_1_doma-defense-of-marriage-act-traditional-marriag e) that denies federal benefits to same-sex couples who are legally married in the states where they reside. The decision was 5 to 4, with Justice Anthony M. Kennedy joining the court’ s liberals to form the majority. It did not address the question of whether there was a constitutional right to same-sex marriages. But the court said DOMA violated equal protection laws to provide benefits to heterosexual couples while denying them to gay couples in the 12 states and the District of Columbia where same-sex couples can marry. “DOMA instructs all federal officials, and indeed all persons with whom same-sex couples interact, including their own children, that their marriage is less worthy than the marriages of others,” Kennedy wrote. “The federal statute is invalid, for no legitimate purpose overcomes the purpose and effect to disparage and to injure those whom the State, by its marriage laws, sought to protect in personhood and dignity.” The law, passed by bipartisan majorities in Congress and signed by President Bill Clinton, recognized marriage as only between one man and one woman. It passed at a time when same-sex marriage was not legal anywhere in the world. Kennedy was joined by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen G. Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan. In a second ruling Wednesday morning, the court gave another boost to same-sex unions, clearing the way for gay marriages in California by declining to rule on the state’s Proposition 8, which defined marriage as between one man and one woman. In the DOMA case, Justice Antonin Scalia read a lengthy and scathing dissent from the bench, saying the court should have left the matter for Congress to settle and had unfairly labeled proponents of traditional marriage as bigots. “In the majority’s telling, this story is black and white: hate your neighbor or come along with us,” Scalia said. “It is hard to admit that one’s political opponents are not monsters, especially in a struggle like this one, and the challenge in the end proves more than today’s court can handle.” Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr. also dissented. Roberts wrote separately to emphasize that the opinion did not address a broader right to marriage. “We may in the future have to resolve challenges to state marriage definitions affecting same-sex couples,” Roberts wrote. “That issue, however, is not before us in this case.” The case was brought by 83-year-old Edith Windsor, who married Thea Spyer, her partner of more than 40 years, in Canada in 2007. Both were residents of New York. When Spyer died in 2009, she left her estate to Windsor. At that time, New York recognized the marriage. But because it was not recognized by the U.S. government, Windsor paid a federal estate tax bill of more than $360,000 that would not have been assessed if she were married to a man. After learning of the Supreme Court ruling, Windsor broke into tears. “If I had to survive Thea, what a glorious way to do it, and she would be so pleased,” she said at a news conference. She thanked her lawyers and her allies, gay and straight: “We won all the way, so thank you from the bottom of my heart.” Asked what Spyer would say to her if she were alive, Windsor replied, “‘ You did it, honey.’ ” The Obama administration had agreed with the appeals court that ordered a refund but wanted the Supreme Court to render a definitive verdict on DOMA. In a statement written aboard Air Force One en route to Africa, President Obama on Wednesday welcomed the Supreme Court decision striking down DOMA, which he called “discrimination enshrined in law” because it had treated gay and lesbian couples as lesser people. “The laws of our land are catching up to the fundamental truth that millions of Americans hold in our hearts: when all Americans are treated as equal, no matter who they are or whom they love, we are all more free,” Obama said in the statement. He said he had directed Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. to work with other Cabinet members in ensuring that the decision is carried out quickly. In celebration of the ruling, the National Cathedral and seven other churches in Washington rang their bells at noon. But others were disappointed by the ruling, including House Speaker John A. Boehner (R-Ohio). “A robust national debate over marriage will continue in the public square, and it is my hope that states will define marriage as the union between one man and one woman,” Boehner said in a statement. A group of conservative Republicans in the House sharply criticized the Supreme Court decisions. “A narrow radical majority of the court has substituted their personal views for the constitutional decisions of the American voters and their elected representatives,” said Rep. Tim Huelskamp (Kan.). He said he would file a federal marriage amendment this week. -- -- Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community <[email protected]> Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
