Government

More News | | | Editor

Supreme Court strikes down federal marriage provision

  • Follow Government

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that legally married same-sex couples should get the same federal benefits as heterosexual couples.

Supporters of gay marriage embrace outside the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington.  CHARLES DHARAPAK/ASSOCIATED PRESS
CHARLES DHARAPAK/ASSOCIATED PRESS
Supporters of gay marriage embrace outside the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington.

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-sex 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-sex unions were legal there.

The court has yet to release its decision on California’s ban on same-sex marriage.

“Under DOMA, same-sex 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.”

The law was passed in 1996 by broad majorities in the House of Representatives and the Senate, and signed into law by Democratic President Bill Clinton. Since then, many lawmakers who voted for the law and Clinton have renounced their support.

Comments (75) Add comment
ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for following agreed-upon rules of civility. Posts and comments do not reflect the views of this site. Posts and comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment.
Little Lamb
46918
Points
Little Lamb 06/26/13 - 10:40 am
10
3
Bad Idea

It is a bad idea to have the federal government regulate marriage. That has traditionally been a state function, and it should remain that way.

I guess now that unmarried people are the minority most persecuted by the federal government.

corgimom
34061
Points
corgimom 06/26/13 - 10:45 am
6
6
DOMA never should've been

DOMA never should've been passed in the first place. But the ACES is in a dither, they don't know what they should write about first- the changes to the Voting Act, the repeal of DOMA, or that gay marriage is legal again in California.

Dixieman
15992
Points
Dixieman 06/26/13 - 11:49 am
7
4
Oooooooooh...June 26 will hereafter be known as Big Ol' Gay Day

Ruling struck down Section 2 of DOMA saying Federal government cannot recognize gay "marriages" in states for Federal benefits, tax filing status, other Federal laws. How about Section 2 of DOMA that says states cannot be compelled to recognize gay marriages from other states? This was not at issue in the case decided today.

I really don't mind if Massachusetts etc. want to redefine marriage as two people of the same sex, or three radishes and a horse, as long as we do not under the Full Faith and Credit Clause have to recognize them as married if they move to SC or GA. I am really concerned that a Federal statute like DOMA cannot override the FFC of the Constitution. A Constitutional amendment is probably needed to prevent one State or a few from imposing their will and values on all of us.

And what are all these weird twitter posts from gay militants doing up above this forum? What is this "Storify"? Never seen this on the AC before. Is the AC doing this or has this page been hacked and hijacked?

GiantsAllDay
9853
Points
GiantsAllDay 06/26/13 - 11:03 am
7
8
This was a very narrow

This was a very narrow ruling, but that's what I expected. Georgia prohibits marriage equality in its constitution. It will be one of the last five states to approve marriage equality, IMO. When California re-legalizes same-sex marriage, it will trigger Oregon and Nevada, and probably Arizona, to follow suit. New Mexico will then come on stream. The frustrated religio-homophobes will renew their noisy and offensive rhetoric condemning gay people, garnering more sympathy for legal same-sex marriage in Colorado and Wyoming. Etc. Very soon over 50% of the population will live in a state where same sex marriage is legal. Many companies will have headquarters in these states. They will want to extend benefits to all their employees, including those who live in Georgia. Some companies will be reluctant to relocate to georgia. And just today the was a LTE stating that the economic health of Georgia looks good. May have to re think that. Like I said, I'm fairly certain georgia will be one of the last 5 to approve marriage equality. That's why I wish the SCOTUS ruling would have been more broad. The court is allowing georgia to be a bigoted as it wants to be. Evolve or go the way of the Neanderthals.

GiantsAllDay
9853
Points
GiantsAllDay 06/26/13 - 11:08 am
6
5
Dixieman, you want believe

Dixieman, you wont believe thus, but I was just thinking of that yesterday! A same sex couple should get married in CA, then move to GA and sue the state under the full faith and credit clause. Trust me it will happen! And soon! What then? The handwriting is on the wall, IMO.

GiantsAllDay
9853
Points
GiantsAllDay 06/26/13 - 11:14 am
2
4
Dixieman, did you know that

Dixieman, did you know that it is ten years, to the day of Lawrence v Texas? Progress is slow sometimes.

Sean Moores
717
Points
Sean Moores 06/26/13 - 11:29 am
4
2
@ Dixieman

We have done this before, usually as a standalone piece. We also run tweets/comments in Crowdsourced in the print edition and online weekly. That being said, I would prefer to have a little more balance in the responses.

InChristLove
22481
Points
InChristLove 06/26/13 - 12:42 pm
10
7
In my opinion, a sad day.n

In my opinion, a sad day.n GAD "The frustrated religio-homophobes", people who abide by biblical standards may be frustrated but we aren't homophobes. We just believe is obeying the Lord. Sadly we must live in the world, but thankfully we are not of this world. Enjoy it while you can....it's only temporary.

GiantsAllDay
9853
Points
GiantsAllDay 06/26/13 - 12:01 pm
5
4
ICL, "There are more things

ICL,
"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
- Hamlet (1.5.166-7), Hamlet to Horatio

InChristLove
22481
Points
InChristLove 06/26/13 - 12:26 pm
5
1
GAD, since you used the

GAD, since you used the quote, what do you suppose Hamlet was telling Horatio?

It is true, often when things seem wrong, confusing or unjust to it than meets the eye and that is why I have faith that God is in control and I need not worry about it. God sees the larger picture so all I need to do is trust.

lifelongresident
1323
Points
lifelongresident 06/26/13 - 12:33 pm
0
0
wait...the sound in the
Unpublished

wait...the sound in the distance you hear are the polygamist running full speed to have their plaural marriages recognized, within the next 3-5 years a man will be able to legally marry as many women as he wants-just like the muslims, as well as women marrying as many men as she wants, then the next group will be the NAMBLA group just waiting to have their lifestyle recognized and withing 5-7 years they will be marrying their young boys then the fags, [filtered word], queers, and butt pirates will be able to have parties with the young boy lovers of NAMBLA combined into one big sodofest..and lastly you have the animal lovers using the courts to recognize their right to marry and have sex with their pets.....jesus can't come fast enuff

Bizkit
32936
Points
Bizkit 06/26/13 - 12:37 pm
5
2
Yeah for equality. Now if we

Yeah for equality. Now if we can get rid of the progressive tax system and unequal taxation and end another discriminatory injustice. Marriage will only be equal when a homo sapiens can marry a dead person or another species of animal-down with necrophobia and beastiphobia. So many haters out there.

Bizkit
32936
Points
Bizkit 06/26/13 - 12:46 pm
4
0
The Supreme Court is really

The Supreme Court is really ruling (not on gay marriage) on the Govt can't discriminate (just like Roe vs Wade wasn't directly about abortion but right to privacy). Since the SCOTUS supports the Govt can't discriminate-we can now use this case as a precedence to strike down the discriminatory progressive tax code. The Govt must treat us all equally. Sadly the progressive tax code discrimination affects those of all ethnicities, age, and gender-so it is a multiple offender.

Fiat_Lux
15910
Points
Fiat_Lux 06/26/13 - 01:08 pm
11
6
And the hits just keep on coming

Kiss our way of life good-bye folks. States rights and the individual right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness as a traditionalist or Christian is virtually a thing of the past, as the soulless federales take over more and more of our day-to-day lives, in its relentless obliteration of the foundational values of our country, which now are being determined via popular vote by the moral dregs of western civilization.

Sigh. It was nice for the almost 240 years that it has lasted. Now a lot of us will be hoping to avoid the soviet-style persecution and incarceration that looms down the road, when voicing our opposition will be criminalized as a hate crime.

Oz is an option for anyone under 40 in good health and with marketable job skills. For the rest of us, the Libtards are just waiting for us to die off so that the bacchanalia can carry on without distractions.

RMSHEFF
16638
Points
RMSHEFF 06/26/13 - 01:07 pm
7
2
The court has become

The court has become political and we have 5 liberals and 4 conservatives when it comes to social issues. . These decisions should be made on the basis of constitutionality. This questions is: Who in our society should be able to define what constitutes marriage? They said its not the people, state or God but its the Federal Government. This is a states rights argument. Once again the federal government has told the people what they can and cannot do......there is a pattern here. We are losing our individual rights to an all powerful Federal government. The people in each state should be able to decide on the conditions under which a marriage license is granted. Many states would decide on Gay marriage and some would not....this is how it should be. Now that the Federal government is able to define marriage on what grounds could they deny polygamy or any other combination. Each person can define what marriage is to them and everyone else will have to accept this.

GiantsAllDay
9853
Points
GiantsAllDay 06/26/13 - 01:11 pm
3
9
A gay military couple with

A gay military couple with children, married elsewhere, is to be stationed at Fort Gordon in Georgia.

Do both individuals have custody of their children while living in Georgia. What happens, if one is killed in combat? Is the survivor still a legal parent?

A corporation wants to relocate an employee who is married in california, to Georgia, but cannot. The additional state taxes paid as singles, preclude the "promotion."

Guess Georgia has a "proud tradition of" . . . something. What's it called?

Little Lamb
46918
Points
Little Lamb 06/26/13 - 01:21 pm
7
0
Hypothetically

Nice hypothetical questions, GAD.

RMSHEFF
16638
Points
RMSHEFF 06/26/13 - 01:30 pm
6
0
Another question....on what

Another question....on what basis can a state disallow polygamy? The state is no longer allowed to define marriage.....the "people" no longer have a say !

Dixieman
15992
Points
Dixieman 06/26/13 - 01:49 pm
8
4
Q: What are three radishes and a horse? A: A marriage

And the nice legal questions will continue to multiply like rabbits with varying silly answers imposed on our society by people in black robes.
Polygamy cannot be far behind. All the arguments in favor of gay "marriage" apply with equal force and logic to polygamy. Polygamy has been around for several thousand years, much longer than any notion of same-sex "marriage," and is today accepted in most Islamic countries and many Asian ones, many more places than gay "marriage". Some churches are already looking forward to that -- check out the "Unitarian Universalists for Polyamory Awareness" website -- can the Episcopalians be far behind?? So all you people out there who are bigots about any number greater than 2 -- you have been warned!
I think I'm going to start a club called "3+". (Y'all know what will go on there.)
Well, if my wife will let me.
Y'all can join. (Actually, this concepts gives a whole new dimension of meaning to the word "y'all," doesn't it?)

Fiat Lux -- Singapore is good too. Let me know when you want to leave and I'll pack my bag.

dahreese
4743
Points
dahreese 06/26/13 - 01:47 pm
3
9
"I have faith that God is in
Unpublished

"I have faith that God is in control and I need not worry about it."

I once was the "Chaplain" on the cancer floor of a hospital.

If you ever see someone suffering with cancer and the pain is so bad that modern drugs cannot stop it, you be sure to tell them "God is in control and you need not worry about your pain."

GiantsAllDay
9853
Points
GiantsAllDay 06/26/13 - 01:47 pm
6
10
I think all of us need to

I think all of us need to decide how we're going to handle today's SCOTUS decision. Most will do nothing and that's cool. The bigots will crawl back into their bigot caves and sulk. Some religious types will go to church this Sunday and listen to the preacher pound his fist on the pulpit and tell them the world is close to an end and a dead guy from 2,000 years ago is coming back to kick butt and take names. I(a straight male, mind you) have decided to go some friends home a few doors down from me here in Northern California who are a lesbian couple. I'm going to hug them and cry tears of joy with them. I'm also going to offer to bring flowers and rice to the court house. You see folks, there is a human element to what happened today. Do any of you remember Brown vs Board of Education? That was a huge day to a certain segment of society. Today is equally as big to the gay community. I say good for them and I share in their joy today. I say don't judge us heteros on the actions of a few. Sometimes good does triumph over evil and that what makes today a great day.

Bizkit
32936
Points
Bizkit 06/26/13 - 01:56 pm
5
3
But if you are Christian then

But if you are Christian then it is equivalent to living in Sodom and Gomorrah-like it isn't already. As far as a point of Government then it is a great day for freedom. I love freedom in govt-next to keep the gunophobes at bay and protect another freedom. The "assault" on freedoms are everywhere.

RMSHEFF
16638
Points
RMSHEFF 06/26/13 - 02:03 pm
6
0
Giants

From your last post it is safe to assume you have no use for God or God's Word.

Bizkit
32936
Points
Bizkit 06/26/13 - 02:03 pm
6
0
Funny an ex-Chaplain who

Funny an ex-Chaplain who questions faith while polls indicate some 80% of physicians believe in God and hold a faith. I can see why both are driven to such in dealing with human suffering and the human condition. I would hope Christians appreciate their freedom of faith is protected by the same govt that is now protecting another groups freedom-we are tied at the hip whether you like it or not.

GiantsAllDay
9853
Points
GiantsAllDay 06/26/13 - 02:10 pm
2
7
RMSHEF, getting involved with

RMSHEF, getting involved with your question may take us down a road that will get us way off topic of this news story. So I'll answer once and thats it until and story on god appears. But I guess I would need a definition of god and gods word. But, just the other day discovered absolute proof that god is real and exists! Yea!!!! Christians however, will disappointed to learn that it is the god Osiris.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2346758/Ancient-Egyptian-statue-...

RMSHEFF
16638
Points
RMSHEFF 06/26/13 - 02:24 pm
6
1
Bizkit

We are losing our freedoms each and every day. Our freedom to worship God will be under attack as well. You would think the Gay rights movement would now be satisfied after today but you will learn soon they are not. This is just starting and now gay marriage will be seen as a civil rights issue, including punishment for people who resist on Biblical grounds and many discrimination lawsuits. There will be attempts to force the Church to hire without regards to sexual orientation based on numbers as with the civil rights movement. This will silence many who faithfully preach God's word on this subject. The thought police will be out in full force back by the weight of the Federal Government. Put on your seatbelt and read the book of Revelations because these thing are happening very quickly.

mad consumer
178
Points
mad consumer 06/26/13 - 02:33 pm
6
3
Can i marry my brother?

Does this mean I can marry my brother since we're the same sex, so we can get the benefits of a married couple?

OJP
6948
Points
OJP 06/26/13 - 02:50 pm
3
3
@Fiat_Lux

This ruling was based on federalism and states' rights. The Supreme Court said that marriage is up to the states.

It's exactly what you are complaining it should be.

OJP
6948
Points
OJP 06/26/13 - 02:52 pm
3
3
@RMSHEFF

See above.

The Court said the federal government cannot define marriage (via DOMA) because that is a state right.

OJP
6948
Points
OJP 06/26/13 - 02:54 pm
2
2
@GiantsAllDay

Currently, states are not required to recognize the gay marriages performed by other states. In your hypothetical, the couple would not be married (and not entitled to federal marriage benefits).

Back to Top

Top headlines

Georgia to monitor potential Ebola travelers

The new screening comes on the heels of a decision to funnel all of the travelers from Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone to one of five airports where CDC and airports are conducting enhanced ...
Search Augusta jobs