Mobile Version
Free Internet Press
  Uncensored News For Real People

FIP Year In Review

FIP Month in Review

FIP Archive Search

Multiple Discoveries from NASA's New Horizons Pluto Mission

R.I.P. William 'Bill' Herbert Kelder - Intellpuke

Gamers Donate 37,500 Pounds Of Food To Needy

Statement From The Whitehouse Regarding The Government Shutdown

An Open Response To 'Organizing for Action'

Bayou Corne: The Biggest Ongoing Disaster In The U.S. You Have Not Heard Of

Boston Mayor Hopes Feds 'Throw the Book' at Marathon Bombing Suspect

Boston Police Closing In On Suspects

2 Explosions At Boston Marathon. 2 Dead, Many Injured.

The Press vs Citizens Rights and Privacy - Act 3

CBS News - Year In Review 2012 - 366 Days: 2012 In Review

The Guardian - 2012 In Review: An Interactive Guide To The Year That Was

TruTV - The Biggest Conspiracy Theories of 2012

Colbert Nation: 2012: A Look Back

FIP Year In Review(s?)

Happy Holidays

Welcome To A New Era!

An Open Letter To United Health Care, Medcom, And The Medical Insurance Industry In General

Whitehouse Petition To Remove "Under God" and "In God" From Currency And The Pledge.

December 21, 2012

If Hillary Clinton Ran For President, She Would Probably Be The Best-prepared Candidate In American History

CIA Director David Petraeus Resigns After FBI Investigation Uncovers Affair With High-Profile Journalist

FIP Format Update

Thank you for voting.

Live Election Results

FIP In Hiatus

U.S.-Afghan Military Operations Suspended After Attacks

Iran Nuclear Chief Says IAEA Might Be Infiltrated By 'Terrorists And Saboteurs'

Romney Stands By Gaffe

Federal Court In Boston Rules 'Defense Of Marriage Act' Is Unconstitutional
2012-05-31 14:35:59 (226 weeks ago)
Posted By: Intellpuke

A U.S. Federal Appeals Court has struck down the Defense of Marriage Act – Congress' key legislation to block gay marriage – as unconstitutional in a ruling that will propel the issue to the Supreme Court.

The Boston-based First District Appeals Court upheld a lower court decision that gay marriage is a matter for individual states to decide and that the federal government does not have the authority to deny recognition of same-sex unions.

It is the highest court to date to strike down the 1996 act, known as Doma, which denies gay married couples federal benefits and protections given to heterosexuals such as health coverage, social security payments and medical leave. A host of states have passed their own bans on gay marriage, but eight states and the District of Columbia have authorized same-sex unions.

The ruling, in a case brought by same-sex couples who married in Massachusetts, is likely to sharpen the political debate over the issue during the presidential election campaign following President Barack Obama's historic statement of support for gay marriage.

The Human Rights Campaign, a civil rights organization pressing for equality, called the ruling historic.

"For the first time, a federal appeals court has recognized that our constitution will not tolerate a law that forces the federal government to deny lawfully -married same-sex couples equal treatment. The writing is clearly on the wall for the demise of this unjust and indefensible law that hurts real families," said the HRC president, Joe Solmonese.

(story continues below)

The ruling was authored by a judge widely regarded as conservative, Michael Boudin, who was appointed by President George Bush, Sr. However, the three-judge panel's position may be seen as conservative because it emphasizes states rights over federal power by saying that if states are free to ban gay marriage they should also be free to legalize it without interference from Washington.

"Many Americans believe that marriage is the union of a man and a woman, and most Americans live in states where that is the law today. One virtue of federalism is that it permits this diversity of governance based on local choice, but this applies as well to the states that have chosen to legalize same-sex marriage," Boudin said in the ruling.

"Under current supreme court authority, Congress' denial of federal benefits to same-sex couples lawfully married in Massachusetts has not been adequately supported by any permissible federal interest."

Boudin said that the court did not believe that Doma was motivated principally by hostility to homosexuality.

"The many legislators who supported Doma acted from a variety of motives, one central and expressed aim being to preserve the heritage of marriage as traditionally defined over centuries of western civilization," he wrote.

Boudin added that attitudes toward discrimination against minorities have evolved to the point where they are no longer acceptable. He said that for 150 years the "desire to maintain tradition would alone have been justification enough for almost any statute".

"But supreme court decisions in the last 50 years call for closer scrutiny of government action touching upon minority group interests and of federal action in areas of traditional state concern," wrote Boudin.

The appeals court said it recognizes that it would not have the final word and that "only the supreme court can finally decide this unique case".

The case was brought by three surviving spouses of same sex marriages in Massachusetts and seven other same-sex couples after they were denied federal benefits.

The Massachusetts attorney general, Martha Coakley, praised the ruling. "Today's landmark ruling makes clear once again that Doma is a discriminatory law for which there is no justification. It is unconstitutional for the federal government to create a system of first and second class marriages, and it does harm to families in Massachusetts every day," she said.

"All Massachusetts couples should be afforded the same rights and protections under the law, and we hope that this decision will be the final step toward ensuring that equality for all."

The Boston ruling follows a similar decision by a district judge in California last week that Doma is unconstitutional, a further chipping away at the law that is almost certain to see it land before the supreme court within the next year or so.

The legal battle has been complicated by the White House's decision to no longer defend Doma in court. That has forced the Republican speaker of the House of Representatives, John Boehner, to set up the Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group to defend the legislation.

In the California decision last week, Judge Claudia Wilken referred to a 1996 supreme court ruling on discrimination measures in Colorado that found gays and lesbians are protected from "burdensome legislation that is the product of sheer anti-gay animus and devoid of any legitimate governmental purpose".

Wilken also cited the nature of deliberations in Congress which she said showed "evidence of moral condemnation and social disapprobation of same-sex couples".

"The legislative history described above demonstrates that animus toward, and moral rejection of, homosexuality and same-sex relationships are apparent in the congressional record," she wrote.

A Washington Post-ABC News opinion poll published last week found that more Americans than ever support the right of gay couples to marry with 53% in favor and 39% opposed.

Intellpuke: You can read this article by Guardian Washington, D.C., correspondent Chris McGreal in context here:

Email To A Friend
Email this story to a friend:
Your Name:
Their Email:
Readers Comments
Add your own comment.
(Anonymous commenting now enabled.)

Creative Commons License
Free Internet Press is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 United States License. You may reuse or distribute original works on this site, with attribution per the above license.

Any mirrored or quoted materials may be copyright their respective authors, publications, or outlets, as shown on their publication, indicated by the link in the news story. Such works are used under the fair use doctrine of United States copyright law. Should any materials be found overused or objectionable to the copyright holder, notification should be sent to, and the work will be removed and replaced with such notification.

Please email with any questions.

Our Privacy Policy can be viewed at

XML/RSS/RDF Newsfeed Syndication XML/RSS/RDF Newsfeed Syndication:

XML/RSS/RDF Newsfeed Syndication XML News Sitemap