DOMA overturned

[Kevin Slater]

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/12-307_g2bh.pdf

 

Kevin Slater

[bigvalboy]

Rachel Maddow...."This is a very big deal" with sweeping consequences. And now 'praying' for all my brothers and sisters out in 'Cali' on Prop 8.....

[Kevin Slater]

And now 'praying' for all my brothers and sisters out in 'Cali' on Prop 8.....

 

Suggestions in the DOMA case that Prop. 8 case will be dismissed for lack of standing, meaning that the lower court ruling survives, meaning Prop 8 is overturned (not on merits, but that no one proper brought the case to the US supreme court).

 

Kevin Slater

[bigvalboy]

The trial Judges decisions stands....Same Sex Marriage can resume in California. I know you guys are celebrating in the "Golden State"...Most assuredly they will be celebrating in the streets. To all my friends in the Bay area to those south to Palm Springs, my heart is with you......And I promise we will be celebrating in FTL as well. I raise my glass to all those that marched and fought so hard for this...BUT ...There is much work to do.... 37 more to go!

[+ deej]

The DOMA ruling brings broad consequences. Because it was decided on equal protection grounds the language of the decision can be used in state cases. This is huge.

[+ Axiom2001]

The trial Judges decisions stands....Same Sex Marriage can resume in California. I know you guys are celebrating in the "Golden State"...Most assuredly they will be celebrating in the streets. To all my friends in the Bay area to those south to Palm Springs, my heart is with you......And I promise we will be celebrating in FTL as well. I raise my glass to all those that marched and fought so hard for this...BUT ...There is much work to do.... 37 more to go!

 

As a Californian I thunderously applaud the two decisions of the US Supreme Court today, but with thumbs down I DAMN them as equally on the appalling decision made by the majority {5-4} yesterday in regard to the

major part of the VOTING RIGHTS ACT yesterday, June 25, 2013.

[+ Axiom2001]

Today's {June 26, 2013} US decision on DOMA and Prop 8 {California} = great, stupendous. Now the rest of the states in the United States should allow ALL of its

interested citizens who desire to marriage be granted this right! "With liberty and justice for all" would become a true reality for all US citizens.

[tyro]

This is a good day indeed. My idol Weezie (self-help writer, speaker, publisher, and 86-years-young dynamo Louise L. Hay) has said for years, "I just want to create a world where it's safe for us to love each other. That's all."

We're getting there.

T

[+ deej]

Now the rest of the states in the United States should allow ALL of its interested citizens who desire to marriage be granted this right!

 

As Rachel Maddow points out, the overturn of DOMA sets up an almost irreconcilable dissonance for residents of states that ban same sex marriage: the federal government recognizes gay marriage but not my state?

 

Justice Kennedy's majority opinion very clearly says it applies "in states the allow same-sex marriage", but that's only going to beg the question in states that don't.

[Guest countryboywny]

I applaud this ruling.

[leigh.bess.toad]

http://i.imgur.com/D8j4Zgf.jpg

[seeker630]

http://i.imgur.com/D8j4Zgf.jpg

 

Actually, I suspect the screaming is louder than ever!

[leigh.bess.toad]

And just so everyone in NYC knows, Edie Windsor is going to be one of the Grand Marshalls in the NYC pride parade this weekend. The cheers for this woman will be deafening.

[Epigonos]

Do keep in mind that the (a) key element of DOMA has NOT been addressed by this decision. That part of DOMA proclaims that states which do not recognize same sex marriage do NOT have to recognize the validity of same of sex marriages performed in states that do permit them. Thus the marriage of a same sex couple married in California will NOT be recognized as valid in Texas. Until this issue is addressed and resolved, (likely under Article IV Section 1 of the Constitution – The Full Faith and Credit clause) a great deal of uncertainty regarding the national validity of same sex marriage will continue.

[Frequentflier]

And just so everyone in NYC knows, Edie Windsor is going to be one of the Grand Marshalls in the NYC pride parade this weekend. The cheers for this woman will be deafening.

 

That's great and I hope there are many videos to capture the reception she'll undoubtedly receive. I've seen a few interviews with her and she seems like a wonderful and classy lady. Very glad for her and how great that she had the fortitude (and money perhaps) to fight/fight/fight for herself and so many others.

[Frequentflier]

So its true that the fight isn't over until all the states recognize same sex marriage (and civil unions aren't the same). Fair to say though that today's decisions fill the sails with a fresh breeze to help carry the fight forward and maybe now more than in the past our confidence is greater success will be achieved sooner rather than later !?! Is it possible more litigation against states that don't recognize same sex marriage (from other states or not) is a good course of action?

[uwsman2]

There are lawsuits on file now in many states seeking same-sex marriage rights - NJ, IL, NV, HW, NM. And there are proposals to put on the ballot initiatives to repeal the anti-gay-marriage amendments in several states. So the fight continues to move forward.

 

Justice Kennedy's DOMA opinion says he is not deciding the underlying question whether same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry. The only question the Court was deciding was whether the federal government must treat equally same-sex and different-sex marriages that are lawfully created under state law.

 

But in his dissent, Justice Scalia argued that Kennedy's analysis would support a claim for the right of same-sex couples to marry. He even devotes a page of his decision to producing an "edited" version of parts of Kennedy's opinion that could be used by a court that wants to rule in favor of same-sex marriage. Thanks, Nino, for giving this roadmap to the lower courts.

[leigh.bess.toad]

And then Nino went on to Argle Bargle. Whatever that is.

 

Can you gargle Argle Bargle?

[Kevin Slater]

And then Nino went on to Argle Bargle. Whatever that is.

 

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/national/2013/06/brouhaha-behind-argle-bargle-linguistic-explanation/66630/

 

Kevin Slater

[+ deej]

Do keep in mind that the (a) key element of DOMA has NOT been addressed by this decision. That part of DOMA proclaims that states which do not recognize same sex marriage do NOT have to recognize the validity of same of sex marriages performed in states that do permit them. Thus the marriage of a same sex couple married in California will NOT be recognized as valid in Texas. Until this issue is addressed and resolved, (likely under Article IV Section 1 of the Constitution – The Full Faith and Credit clause) a great deal of uncertainty regarding the national validity of same sex marriage will continue.

 

These cases are coming. They're inevitable, in fact.

 

The Obama administration says they're going to rewrite regulations so that federal benefits follow you if you marry and then move to a state that doesn't allow gay marriage. (Currently, they don't.) But that's only half a loaf, too.

 

Someone will sue. There's another Edie Windsor out there ready to draw his or her line in the sand. Probably sooner rather than later. In Scalia's dissent he even says as much (and hates the thought of it), and predicts it may come as soon as next session.

[trilingual]

My understanding is that there are already a number of Prop 8-like cases working their way up to the Supremes, and they don't have the problematic "standing" issues that kept the Court from ruling broadly in the California case. However, Judge Walker's outstanding district court decision, which overturned Prop 8, provides a road map for the repeal of the other anti-marriage amendments. So do the Supreme Court's findings against DOMA, based as they are on equal protection grounds.

 

Legislation was just introduced in Congress to repeal what remains of DOMA. If that passes, it will eliminate the odious Section 2 that gives states the right to not honor the valid marriages of other states. If that doesn't succeed in this hateful Congress, there are apparently lawsuits seeking the same results. So one way or another full equality is coming, even if it won't be overnight!

[+ deej]

My understanding is that there are already a number of Prop 8-like cases working their way up to the Supremes, and they don't have the problematic "standing" issues that kept the Court from ruling broadly in the California case. However, Judge Walker's outstanding district court decision, which overturned Prop 8, provides a road map for the repeal of the other anti-marriage amendments. So do the Supreme Court's findings against DOMA, based as they are on equal protection grounds.

 

Yeah and Scalia's dissent even moans (in his adorably bile-filled way) that this decision will be used in other cases facing the court, possibly as soon as next session.

 

Let's hope he's as prescient as he was in his (again, adorably bile-filled) dissent in Lawrence v. Texas, where he said that if homosexuality becomes morally accepted they'll soon want to marry. Right!

 

Legislation was just introduced in Congress to repeal what remains of DOMA. If that passes, it will eliminate the odious Section 2 that gives states the right to not honor the valid marriages of other states. If that doesn't succeed in this hateful Congress, there are apparently lawsuits seeking the same results. So one way or another full equality is coming, even if it won't be overnight!

 

If Sen. Feinstein's repeal bill fails, section 2 will fall as soon as someone brings a "full faith and credit" suit, but it wasn't even possible to do until this decision happened.

 

Article 4 of the constitution:

 

Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State.

 

Unequivocal.

[AdamSmith]

NPR this morning mentioned an example of a situation that could conceivably provide the basis for a challenge on full-faith-and-credit grounds (and also shows the kind of mess that comes of nullifying that clause). The story was of a same-sex couple married in D.C. who now reside in Virginia. Their income status is such that they would benefit from filing federal taxes jointly. However, Virginia (1) requires that they file state taxes individually, because the state does not recognize same-sex marriage, and (2) has a law requiring that state taxes and federal taxes must be filed in the same manner: that is, either individually or jointly. The result is that Virginia law effectively prohibits them from filing federal taxes jointly, even after this week's DOMA ruling.

[Frequentflier]

NPR this morning mentioned an example of a situation that could conceivably provide the basis for a challenge on full-faith-and-credit grounds (and also shows the kind of mess that comes of nullifying that clause). The story was of a same-sex couple married in D.C. who now reside in Virginia. Their income status is such that they would benefit from filing federal taxes jointly. However, Virginia (1) requires that they file state taxes individually, because the state does not recognize same-sex marriage, and (2) has a law requiring that state taxes and federal taxes must be filed in the same manner: that is, either individually or jointly. The result is that Virginia law effectively prohibits them from filing federal taxes jointly, even after this week's DOMA ruling.

 

Wow, isn't that situation complete garbage! I heard the IRS is about to announce whether married couples who until now couldn't file joint returns can file amended returns going back three years. Now that might be a nice little windfall cash for vacations, 2nd homes, college money for the kiddies, etc. And while I'd be glad to see that happen for couples who have been screwed over for years, I'd also get some pleasure thinking of the right winged creeps who oppose equal rights for all citizens knowing the IRS is cutting refund checks to these people. Live long, prosper and have a great weekend!

[Xander]

NPR this morning mentioned an example of a situation that could conceivably provide the basis for a challenge on full-faith-and-credit grounds (and also shows the kind of mess that comes of nullifying that clause). The story was of a same-sex couple married in D.C. who now reside in Virginia. Their income status is such that they would benefit from filing federal taxes jointly. However, Virginia (1) requires that they file state taxes individually, because the state does not recognize same-sex marriage, and (2) has a law requiring that state taxes and federal taxes must be filed in the same manner: that is, either individually or jointly. The result is that Virginia law effectively prohibits them from filing federal taxes jointly, even after this week's DOMA ruling.

 

 

They really aren't making it easy for them to get their tax dollars