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.
RMSHEFF
16001
Points
RMSHEFF 06/26/13 - 06:04 pm
2
1
OPJ

I think the court told the voters in California we don't care what you want, you can't have it !

Fiat_Lux
15429
Points
Fiat_Lux 06/26/13 - 06:15 pm
2
1
@OJP

I've never considered myopia of any sort to be valuable. But to each his own, I guess.

GiantsAllDay
9593
Points
GiantsAllDay 06/26/13 - 07:32 pm
1
3
Fiat, Actually, myopia delays

Fiat,
Actually, myopia delays a need for reading glasses until later on in life. Ask a doctor. To me, that's some sort of value.

OJP
6634
Points
OJP 06/26/13 - 07:55 pm
1
5
@Fiat_Lux

What you see as myopia - likely due to partisan politics or disappointment about this decision's results - is actually just an ability to stay on topic.

But I know nothing will stop the chicken-little mentality of opponents of marriage equality. "This country sucks, blah, blah, blah."

InChristLove
22473
Points
InChristLove 06/26/13 - 08:40 pm
2
2
(faithson) "love ya to death,

(faithson) "love ya to death, but you are putting words in people's mouth's that are not there.... 'God destroyed the city because of homosexual behavior' are YOUR words, or the words of a present day interpreter you are quoting, not OT."

faithson, love ya to death too but I will have to disagree with you. I'm not putting any words in anyone's mouth. Studying the meaning of wicked both in the Greek and Hebrew to determine exactly what the Lord meant when he referred to the people of Sodom and Gomorrah means just what I said. It says physically perverted. Now you might find that uncomfortable and not to your liking but the Lord is the one who said they were "wicked" not I, so who's words am I using. Looks like it was the Lords.

InChristLove
22473
Points
InChristLove 06/26/13 - 08:49 pm
2
0
Well it didn't take long to

Well it didn't take long to change the definition of marriage. Wonder when this occurred

According to Merriam Webster dictionary:

a (1) : the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law (2) : the state of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage

I'd like to know when the definition changed because I have looked in two old dictionaries (different publications) and neither one mention that marriage as the state of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage.

faithson
5158
Points
faithson 06/26/13 - 09:24 pm
2
2
icl

once slavery was accepted on the premise that the black man lacked something that white men had. This lack of 'whatever' had been the accepted norm since the beginings of time, OT pretty clear about slaves. All that a lot of us are saying is that the old mores and taboo's about homosexuality are now being changed, like it or not, this new generation accepts gay people as contemporaries without the stigma of the old ways. One does not have to agree, but one cannot stop the flow of time and evolution of the mores and taboo's. like I said, there won't be any marriages anytime soon at my Catholic church and so be it, yet my church has NO right to impose its position on other non-believers. Being a very social person has given me the opportunity to befriend all types of people. I have compassion for those who do not follow the ways of the general public and seek to have their relationships 'legalized' by the state, NOT a religion. This is definitly one of those, agree to disagree topics . My wife has no problem with the 'legal union', she has problems with the adoption issue, so be it.

Augusta resident
1368
Points
Augusta resident 06/26/13 - 09:29 pm
1
0
Taxes

I never had to show my marriage license when I filed my taxes, they just took my word for it.
Now same sex couples in the military can use base housing, they have been waiting for this ruling.

carcraft
25885
Points
carcraft 06/26/13 - 10:09 pm
2
0
Giants all day. About your

Giants all day. About your 1:11 post. The military is going to be very tricky. If the dependants spouse is the the custodial parent and the active duty member hasn't adopted, the child has no right to benefits. Health care becomes the responsibility of the BIOLOGICAL parents. If the service member is costodial parent nothing changes for the child, the child get benefits . If both same sex couples adopt the paper work had better be together.

myfather15
55706
Points
myfather15 06/26/13 - 10:11 pm
2
2
@GAD

How is it the gay military couple has children? Since it's IMPOSSIBLE for both of them to be biological parents? Yes, I know......adoption. But that doesn't change the FACT that no supreme court will EVER over rule GOD's nature that gay couples CAN NOT have biological children, TOGETHER!! It will NEVER happen, but since you put your faith in MANKIND, please feel free to hope and "pray" that one day science will create a way for gay couples to procreate together. But if I were you, I wouldn't invest my own money into that science, IT WILL NEVER HAPPEN!! Funny how God's rules are still in effect and theres NOTHING men can do about it!!

But one thing did happen today; those sitting on the supreme court just confirmed their job scrubbing toilet bowls during the millenium!! So they can enjoy their "Supreme" existence during this life, because they will certainly not have a place of authority in God's government, which is eternal!!

carcraft
25885
Points
carcraft 06/26/13 - 10:14 pm
2
1
God is not mocked, already

God is not mocked, already our great nation is faltering. we have lost respect around the world (Look at Russia and China thumbing their noses at us over Snowden). Our economy is on crutches and unemployment is about where it was when Obama took office. The fools in congress are passing the immigrating act and hardly even understand what is in it ( one provision prevents the illegals allowed to stay from receiving Obama care, so making the illegal the person of choice to hire because then employers are under no obligation to provide them health care). So march on it is a parade of fools!

myfather15
55706
Points
myfather15 06/26/13 - 10:34 pm
3
1
It's absolutely astounding to

It's absolutely astounding to see people who are Biblically illiterate, trying to interpret the Bible and it's real meaning. Stick to the liberal talking points; the Bible just isn't your strong suit!! Anyone with half an ounce of knowledge about the Bible can snuff out this non-sense!!

SODOM and Gomorrah!! There's a hint in the name. There is also a HINT in the fact that Lot offered his virgin daughters to the MEN of Sodom and they REFUSED and wanted to "KNOW" the men that came to Lot's house. The word KNOW there, is to have carnal knowledge!! So the MEN of Sodom, wanted to have carnal knowledge of the MEN (Angels) who visited Lot's house. They also REFUSED the beautiful daughters of LOT, after he offered them!! Really? Sodom and Gomorrah was about self control?? OMG!!! Now thats funny!!

Young Fred
17460
Points
Young Fred 06/27/13 - 12:32 am
2
0
I'm curious

What if I'm a confirmed bachelor? What if my best buddy and I have lived our life together, we're best friends, share financial responsibilities, but are confirmed hetros? Why shouldn't we get the “marriage benefits”? Is sex the only factor?

Young Fred
17460
Points
Young Fred 06/27/13 - 12:36 am
3
0
I'm curious

What if my best friend is a pit bull that's lived with me for the last 11 years? What if my best buddy was there for me through thick and thin, when nobody else would give me the time of day? Why can't I get vet insurance to take care of my bud?

Young Fred
17460
Points
Young Fred 06/27/13 - 12:57 am
3
0
I'm curious

Maybe my sister and I have lived
together for the last 30 years. We're both hetro but have never met that special somebody. Why shouldn't she get survivor benefits from my federal pension? Why shouldn't I be able to put her on my health insurance plan? It's not “fair”. I think it is high time we start redefining certain words just to make it “fair”.

Young Fred
17460
Points
Young Fred 06/27/13 - 01:00 am
3
0
What a sad day, when

What a sad day, when emotionalism trumps realism.

palmetto1008
9782
Points
palmetto1008 06/27/13 - 05:36 am
2
3
Gee, young Fred, if only the
Unpublished

Gee, young Fred, if only the defenders of DOMA and proposition 8 would of had you representing them in front of the Supreme Court.

soapy_725
43678
Points
soapy_725 06/27/13 - 08:13 am
1
0
Next the pediphiles, necrophiles, beastiality, S&M, ACDC.....
Unpublished

Line up for their rights. We live in a country of individual rights.

soapy_725
43678
Points
soapy_725 06/27/13 - 08:15 am
1
0
Man Boy Love is waiting in the wings. Boy Scouts beware.
Unpublished

Freedom. Freedom. Freedom.

soapy_725
43678
Points
soapy_725 06/27/13 - 08:16 am
1
0
We Will, We Will, Rock Your World... Ain't funny now, is it?
Unpublished

We will stand in the streets and proclaim that GOD is a deviant. And we will be proud.

soapy_725
43678
Points
soapy_725 06/27/13 - 08:17 am
1
0
soapy_725
43678
Points
soapy_725 06/27/13 - 08:18 am
1
0
The "righteous judges" have spoken. So be it.
Unpublished

The "righteous judges" have spoken. So be it.

allhans
23651
Points
allhans 06/27/13 - 08:59 am
1
0
Most benefits being demanded

Most benefits being demanded are federal so it doesn't make a lot of difference which state a person lives.
There are many things I refuse to support, such as "gay" marriage, but I can do this...
We could go to all homosexual relationships, this would lead to the end of humanity....but.........

As Young Fred so clearly stated, this decision makes it easier for any of us to marry solely for financial reasons.

myfather15
55706
Points
myfather15 06/27/13 - 09:37 am
3
1
@allhans

You aren't far of base there. Their goal is NOT marriage equality, thats a disguise for the true agenda. Go to youtube and look up Masha Gesson on gay marriage. She actually exposes the true agenda, and people applaud her. Their true agenda is to destroy the institution of marriage all together!! Thereby getting rid of just another traditional American value.

myfather15
55706
Points
myfather15 06/27/13 - 09:39 am
1
0
Because you're correct,

Because you're correct, through excutor of estates, wills, etc. They already have the ability to leave whomever they choose, their estates.

dahreese
4717
Points
dahreese 06/27/13 - 10:08 am
4
3
@Bizket; "Funny an
Unpublished

@Bizket; "Funny an ex-Chaplain who questions faith while polls indicate some 80% of physicians believe in God and hold a faith."

Understanding that requires an open mind to the fact of what was spiritually taught/learned during youth was a metaphor; "When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man I put away childish things."

Religion is one thing; spirituality is another.

The Church fails to teach the difference.

The believer fails to learn the difference.

myfather15
55706
Points
myfather15 06/27/13 - 03:05 pm
0
0
@dahreese

Care to actually address my specific comment about Sodom and Gomorrah? Or do you just want to keep throwing out generalizations?

But of course, we must be "Open minded" as you and others are, in order to be highly intelligent, right? Impossible for me to get the REAL meaninig of scripture, because I'm too ignorant to understand the difference in metaphors and symbology and the literal.

corgimom
32502
Points
corgimom 06/27/13 - 04:43 pm
1
2
Myfather, please educate

Myfather, please educate yourself. Your idea that homosexuals cannot ever have children is just plain false. I can see that you see things as very black or white with no shades of gray. The truth is that many gay people have relationships with heterosexuals as well as homosexuals and have children just like everybody else. Lots of people try to be heterosexual, finally come to terms with their sexuality, and choose to be homosexual, like they really were all along.

My cousin had 6 children with his wife and he is now married to a man. I know other gay men that have conceived children with women.

The same with lesbian women, too.

I don't know where you got your antiquated ideas that no homosexual can reproduce, but please, you are destroying your credibility by your assertions.

And now with artificial insemination and IVF and surrogacy, anybody can have children regardless of their sexual orientation. Come into the modern world, this isn't 1950 anymore.

corgimom
32502
Points
corgimom 06/27/13 - 04:45 pm
0
1
Masha Gesson could say we're

Masha Gesson could say we're all martians, that doesn't make it true. Get a grip, myfather.

corgimom
32502
Points
corgimom 06/27/13 - 04:49 pm
0
0
Augusta Resident, I had to

Augusta Resident, I had to show my marriage license to the IRS, after they tried to charge me for my husband's exwife's taxes.

And people have to show their marriage licenses in compliance audits. You would be amazed at how many people get questioned.

Back to Top

Top headlines

Many black colleges struggling

Although Paine has struggled with its own failures over the past several years, HBCUs across the nation are dealing with some of the same troubles that are threatening their missions and existence.
Search Augusta jobs