Gay couples’ marital rights are affirmed

By Mac McIntosh

Two federal court decisions in the last month could lead to the legalization of gay marriage. In Massachusetts Federal District Court, the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) was declared unconstitutional. In a separate case, California’s Proposition 8 was also declared unconstitutional by the Federal District Court. If these decisions are upheld through the appeals process, gay marriage may at last become legally recognized across the United States.

The repeal of DOMA would probably have a more far-reaching effect. As enacted by the U.S. Congress, DOMA describes marriage as between one woman and one man. Justice Joseph Tauro declared that DOMA violates the equal protection principles of the U.S. Constitution.

This decision is especially important because it concerns federal laws and benefits. Many states have passed legislation that gives domestic partners and married gay couples all the benefits and rights that the state is able to give. But married gay couples do not have the federal rights and protections that straight couples have because of DOMA’s definition of marriage.

For example, gay couples are denied survivor benefits from Social Security or other federal pensions unless they are married as described in DOMA. Married couples also benefit in filing their income taxes, including the advantage of filing joint returns or claiming one partner as a dependent.

A very important effect of eliminating DOMA would be that states would have to recognize all marriages from other states. I could list other federal benefits and protections for married couples. The critical issue is that all married couples, including gay couples, should enjoy exactly the same rights, protections and benefits.

In the second case, Justice Vaughn Walker in California Federal District Court declared California’s Proposition 8 unconstitutional because it violates the equal protection principles of the U.S. Constitution. Judge Walker asked for a detailed factual record to establish any public interest in supporting Proposition 8. According to Jennifer Pizer of Lambda Legal, proponents were unable to advance any such public interest.

Judge Walker’s decision held that “the evidence shows Proposition 8 does nothing more than enshrine in the California Constitution the notion that opposite-sex couples are superior to same-sex couples. Because California has no interest in discriminating against gay men and lesbians and because Proposition 8 prevents California from fulfilling its constitutional obligation to provide marriages on an equal basis, the court concludes that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional.”

Justice Walker found the proponents’ arguments so flimsy he ordered the California to reinstate gay marriages effective August 19. When supporters of Proposition 8 appealed his decision, gay marriages in California were put on hold again, pending the outcome of the appeal.

The two decisions are important advances along the road to legalization of gay marriages. Unfortunately, going through the appeals process will take years.

Back to Home