The Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that legally married same-gender couples should get the same federal benefits as heterosexual couples.
The court invalidated a provision of the federal Defense of Marriage Act that has prevented married gay couples from receiving a range of tax, health and retirement benefits that are generally available to married people. The vote was 5-4.
Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote the majority opinion.
Same-gender marriage has been adopted by 12 states and the District of Columbia. Another 18,000 couples were married in California during a brief period when same-gender unions were legal there.
The court has yet to release its decision on California’s ban on same-gender marriage.
“Under DOMA, same-gender married couples have their lives burdened, by reason of government decree, in visible and public ways,” Kennedy said.
“DOMA’s principal effect is to identify a subset of state-sanctioned marriages and make them unequal,” he said.
He was joined by the court’s four liberal justices.
Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Samuel Alito, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas dissented.
Scalia read his dissent aloud. Scalia said the court should not have decided the case.
But, given that it did, he said, “we have no power under the Constitution to invalidate this democratically adopted legislation.”
(AP)
Join the official YWN WhatsApp status
7 Responses
That isn’t the important part, since it should be a matter for the state to decide who is married – not the Federal government. The big issue is whether states are required by the Federal constitution to recognize same-gender marriages.
The court just ruled on Prop8 and it’s a weird lineup.
They also did not rule on the legality of Prop8 but found an easy way out. It’s now up to CA to decide if they want to fight it or not.
If you’re reading this comment and under age 60, go elsewhere. In my lifetime we’ve witnessed monumental events that have weakened, no, utterly devalued, American traditions. I am happy, no, thrilled (!), that the America I fought for in the US military will be gone after attendees of my levaya shovel dirt on my oron. My only regrets are for my children, who will be living in an America I don’t recognize. My America, R.I.P.
Today’s cases were correctly decided. Let each state decide whether to grant the legal and economic benefits of civil marriages or unions based on the culture and hashkafah of that state. So in New York and California, the law says equal treatment for all “married” couples. If you don’t like that outcome, move to Texas or Alabama where “traditional” definition of marriage will apply. For yidden, we follow the Ebeshter’s rulings in torah moshe m’sinai v. the rest of the world and we know how to apply the law. Thus, today’s court decision is irrelevant to us whether we live in NY, California or Texas.
The Supreme Court “punted” on the more important California case. Rather than upholding “Proposition 8” they held the plaintiff in the case lacked standing to challenge it in Federal courts.
To Akuperma:
The “standing” issues comes up in a large number of court decisions. They will avoid deciding the underlying policy issue if there are procedural reasons to “punt”. Not sure why you are surprised. Note that Roberts and Scalia agreed there was no reason to reach the merits and that in this case, the lawfully constituted party (i.e. the California AG) with standing to appeal chose not to do so.
We are going to hell in a hand basket.