Lawsuits to have
the federal DOMA law declared unconstitutional: 2004 to 2012
Sponsored link.
In this web site, "DOMA" means the defense of marriage act, and SSM means same-sex marriage.
Overview:
Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders (GLAD) filed a lawsuit against DOMA in Federal District Court in Boston MA called: "Gill et al v. Office of Personnel Management et al." A second and very similar case case was launched by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts: Massachusetts v. Department of Health and Human Services. Both were heard by U.S. District Court Judge Joseph L. Tauro.
Because of the similarity of the cases, he heard and ruled on together on the two challenges to DOMA.
"... two paths to the same point. ... “The DOMA litigation has an additional advantage in the sense that historically marriage has always been a state issue. While I think they’re both the same issue, the DOMA [repeal lawsuits approach is] ... in some sense even a stronger case because it has both the equal protection and due process arguments and the states’ rights arguments." 1
Judge Tauro ruled that the Defense of Marriage Act was clearly unconstitutional on a number of grounds. The federal government -- the defendant in these cases -- appealed the case. Then, in a very unusual case, the Department of Justice decided that DOMA was so obviously unconstitutional that they would not defend it.
However, they would continue to enforce DOMA because it is the law of the land. They will cease enforcing it if:
The Judiciary clearly determines that DOMA is unconstitutional, or
Congress modifies or repeals DOMA.
There are allegedly more than a dozen court cases active in federal courts during 2011-JUL that are attempting to declare DOMA unconstitutional. For example, just during Thursday, 2011-OCT-22:
The Servicemembers Legal Defense Network filed a lawsuit in Massachusetts federal court. They argued that DOMA prevents military members, who now can serve openly, and their families from receiving equal benefits. 2
Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders (GLAD) filed a brief in the appeal of Gill et al. v. Office of Personnel Management. This is one of two cases launched in 2010 in which federal judge found Section 3 of DOMA unconstitutional. Section 3 prevents the federal government from recognizing same-sex marriages that have been solemnized and registered in the District of Columbia or in one of the growing number of states that have legalized SSM.
There is speculation that one or more of these cases might reach the U.S. Supreme Court in 2013.
Page Translator: