PDA

View Full Version : Massachusetts Sues Federal Government Over Defense Of Marriage Law


Titan76
07-09-2009, 08:51 AM
http://edition.cnn.com/2009/US/07/08/massachusetts.marriage.lawsuit/

(CNN) -- Massachusetts sued the U.S. government on Wednesday, challenging the constitutionality of a federal law that defines marriage as the union of a man and a woman.

"We're taking this action today because, first, we believe that [the Defense of Marriage Act] directly interferes with Massachusetts' long-standing sovereign authority to define and regulate the marital status of its residents," Attorney General Martha Coakley said Wednesday afternoon.

"Massachusetts has a single category of married persons, and we view all married persons equally and identically," she said.

"DOMA divides that category into two distinct and unequal classes of marriage."

The lawsuit argues that the act, which became law in 1996, denies same-sex couples essential rights and protections, including federal income tax credits, employment and retirement benefits, health insurance coverage and Social Security payments.

"In enacting DOMA, Congress overstepped its authority, undermined states' efforts to recognize marriages between same-sex couples, and codified an animus towards gay and lesbian people," the state wrote in the lawsuit, which was filed Wednesday in federal court.

Massachusetts, the first state to legalize gay marriage, said that about 16,000 same-sex couples have been married there since 2004, when it began issuing marriage licenses. Since that time, the lawsuit said, "the security and stability of families has been strengthened in important ways throughout the state. "

The state is challenging Section 3 of the law, which defines marriage as "a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife" and a spouse as "a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife."

Before the act, the lawsuit argues, defining marital status was the prerogative of the states.

The law "eviscerated more than 200 years of federal government deference to the states with respect to defining marriage," it said.

The lawsuit also argues that the law forces Massachusetts to treat same-sex married couples differently from heterosexual married couples, particularly through determining who qualifies for the state's Medicaid program, known as MassHealth, and whether a same-sex spouse of a veteran can be buried in a veteran cemetery.

"But for DOMA, married individuals in same-sex relationships in the commonwealth would receive the same status, obligations, responsibilities, rights, and protections as married individuals in different-sex relationships under local, state, and federal laws," the lawsuit said.

The defendants named in the lawsuit include the Department of Health and Human Services, Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius, the Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Affairs Secretary Eric Shinseki and the United States itself.

Charles Miller, a spokesman for the Department of Justice, said the department will review the case but noted that President Obama supports the legislative repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act.

I wonder how the courts will handle this. I'm also interested in knowing if Massachusetts will go all the way to the US Supreme Court if necessary. Could this be the next Roe vs Wade?

moonknight11
07-09-2009, 09:20 AM
Fuck Yeah Massachusetts

Give 'em 'ell

Slam_Bradley
07-09-2009, 10:05 AM
I wonder how the courts will handle this. I'm also interested in knowing if Massachusetts will go all the way to the US Supreme Court if necessary. Could this be the next Roe vs Wade?

It will certainly be interesting to see how the lower courts handle the suit. Keep in mind that the Supreme Court only hears cases it wants to hear.

Gilda Dent
07-09-2009, 07:22 PM
Interesting. This is actually a traditional conservative way of thinking, that the federal DOMA is an unconstitutional infringement on states' rights.

I am eagerly awaiting the flood of right-wing support for states' rights on this issue.

Paul McEnery
07-09-2009, 07:26 PM
I await m'learned friends' contribution, but mightn't there be a downside to this in enforcing a federal marriage equality act?

Donald M.
07-09-2009, 08:14 PM
I'd be a lot more proud of Massachusetts if I didn't live there . . .

mikekerr3
07-09-2009, 08:40 PM
It will certainly be interesting to see how the lower courts handle the suit. Keep in mind that the Supreme Court only hears cases it wants to hear.

The true faith bit in the constition will be pretty hard for judges to ignore evenif the Congress did,

Would you want to be the Government lawyer defending the act?

Slam_Bradley
07-09-2009, 08:54 PM
The true faith bit in the constition will be pretty hard for judges to ignore evenif the Congress did,

Would you want to be the Government lawyer defending the act?

My point was that the Supreme Court doesn't have to make a decision if it doesn't want to. They don't grant Cert and any decision by the lower courts has limited precedence.

Full Faith & Credit is a tricky thing. It doesn't apply to the Federal Government, only between states. And there is long-standing precedent that limits the FF&C that is due to other states marriages.

mikekerr3
07-09-2009, 09:20 PM
My point was that the Supreme Court doesn't have to make a decision if it doesn't want to. They don't grant Cert and any decision by the lower courts has limited precedence.

Full Faith & Credit is a tricky thing. It doesn't apply to the Federal Government, only between states. And there is long-standing precedent that limits the FF&C that is due to other states marriages.

If the Supremes chose not to review the lowers courts decision stands as law, So that's a crap shoot at best for the DOMA .Finding a court in the NE that will support it will be quite a chalenge,

I don' think that the Justice department will put up their best in the fight, some sacrificial lamb will draw the short straw and become the Goverments rep. Whomever it is it will be someone with no political dreams , that's for sure. at least not in the NE.