The Defense of Marriage Act is under siege once again in California. A lesbian couple is challenging the law in District Court. Equality on Trial reports:
In the Cooper-Harris case, which was filed by the Southern Poverty Law Center, a written opinion is expected, since the judge did not issue one from the bench after the arguments. This hearing was on motions for summary judgment on the merits of the constitutionality of DOMA and the other military-related law at issue. Cooper-Harris is a veteran who was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis, and the VA ruled that it was acquired likely as a result of her service. If she were in an opposite-sex marriage she would be entitled to seek spousal benefits, but she is in a legal same-sex marriage and Section 3 of DOMA bars the federal government from recognizing the marriage. Another federal statute related to military benefits is also challenged in the case: it defines marriage as opposite-sex only.
Not sure what will happen here if the Supreme Court invalidates section 3 of DOMA next month, but since this lawsuit does challenge another statute as well, it may continue.
As the end of the Supreme Court term and the release of its final opinions gets closer, more legal experts are weighing in with predictions and thoughts on which outcome in the marriage cases seems the most likely. As EqualityOnTrial has reported, there are lots of complicated options with different outcomes (ranging from good to relatively bad) and just looking at Hollingsworth v. Perry, the Prop 8 case, there’s no consensus on what will happen, though most people who have commented on the case believe the result will be narrow.
Two others recently offered their own thoughts and predictions: Laurence Tribe, who has done LGBT rights work before (most notably arguing before the Supreme Court in Bowers v. Hardwick, but also arguing National Gay Task Force v. Board of Education a year prior to Bowers) wrote commentary on the cases, while former Justice John Paul Stevens made his predictions while speaking at an event in Arlington.
Tribe, a Harvard Law professor, believes the decisions in both the Prop 8 and DOMA cases will be narrow, but he suggested that the result of the Court’s decisions would be that neither law will remain standing.
There’s a new video out showing couples who have been forced to split or leave the country by Defense of Marriage Act. Towleroad.com reports:
Lavi Soloway of the DOMA project put this clip together to show the “Gang of Eight” and those opposed to including gays in immigration reform just a few of the couples getting harmed by leaving it out.
Hopefully either immigration reform or the US Supreme Court ruling will sort this out and help these couples.
Sponsors of the bill to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act is being held by its sponsors pending the US Supreme Court ruling, Towleroad.com says:
Lawmakers are holding off on introducing legislation that would repeal the Defense of Marriage Act until after the Supreme Court rules on the anti-gay law, according to multiple sources familiar with the bill, as one Republican LGBT organization expects Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio) to sign on as a co-sponsor. A number of LGBT advocates familiar with the legislation, which has been known as the Respect for Marriage Act, told the Washington Blade its lead sponsors — Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) in the House and Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) in the Senate — are delaying introduction until after the expected court ruling in June.
Makes sense, since the House would never go along with it anyway. Maybe they could pass ENDA in the meantime?
Blue dog democrat Joe Manchin said Saturday that he regretted voting against the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. Joe.My.God reports:
In December 2010, Manchin broke with Democrats and cast a vote against a procedural motion to advance “don’t ask, don’t tell” repeal legislation. When the Senate voted to repeal the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy later that month, Manchin skipped the vote to attend a “holiday gathering.” “That was the wrong vote,” Manchin said at a Saturday breakfast hosted by National Journal and The Atlantic, which also featured MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow. “Today I would vote the other way.”
Manchin is one of the three remaining Senate Democrats who is not endorse marriage equality, and just recently reiterated his support for DOMA. So he should be regretting that decision in about, what, three more years?
Under US election law, straight couples are allowed to donate jointly to campaigns, avoiding the cap on individual contributions. The Federal Election Commission just ruled that this does not apply to gay lesbian couples. Equality on Trial reports:
Yesterday, the Federal Election Commission (FEC) issued an opinion ruling on an aspect of election law that relies on Section 3 of the federal Defense of Marriage Act to determine whether a married couple can contribute to political campaigns jointly. The FEC generally allows married couples to donate jointly to campaigns, so that the amount doesn’t exceed the cap on individual contributions imposed by federal law. But they were asked to determine if same-sex married couples may legally do the same thing, and their decision says that no, same-sex married couples can’t do this until Section 3 of DOMA is repealed or struck down as unconstitutional by the Supreme Court (a possibility given that they’re reviewing United States v. Windsor now and a decision is expected by late June.
The issue will likely be reconsidered if the Defense of Marriage Act is struck down by the Supreme Court later this year.
A federal judge in Los Angeles clear the way for a lawsuit brought by a binational lesbian couple against the Defense of Marriage Act. LGBTQ Nation reports:
A lesbian couple facing immigration troubles has the standing to challenge the federal Defense of Marriage Act because it violates the constitutional rights of immigrants in same-sex marriages, a federal judge in California has ruled. U.S. District Judge Consuelo Marshall also ordered Friday that the lawsuit, filed last year on behalf of Philippines citizen Jane DeLeon and her spouse Irma Rodriguez, can proceed as a class-action case. DeLeon claimed in the lawsuit that she was eligible to obtain a green card, but wasn’t able to get a waiver she needs to obtain residency here because the U.S. government doesn’t recognize her same-sex marriage to an American.
This case could prove important for the many binational same-sex couples here in the US, especially if the proposed immigration reform in Congress either fails or does not include these couples. The US Supreme Court’s pending decision on DOMA may also offer some relief, but it never hurts to have a backup plan.
A few days ago, we reported on the Oklahoma house passage of a bill to support the Defense of Marriage Act. Now the Senate has passed it too. Oklahoma’s Own reports:
A nonbinding resolution to reaffirm marriage as a union between a man and a woman and support the federal Defense of Marriage Act has been approved in the Oklahoma Senate. The resolution sponsored by Norman Republican Sen. Rob Standridge was quickly adopted Tuesday on a voice vote. The House passed the resolution unanimously last week, but more than a dozen representatives walked out of the chamber instead of voting.
Nothing else pressing that needed doing in Oklahoma? Jobs? The economy?
As Congress debates immigration reform, the US Supreme Court ruling on DOMA could throw a wrench in the works. The Sacramento Bee reports:
If the court rejects a key provision of the Defense of Marriage Act, which denies same-sex married couples federal benefits, the matter is moot. Gay and lesbian couples then should receive the same immigration benefits as opposite-sex couples. But if the court upholds the act, there will be more pressure from advocacy groups on President Barack Obama and members of Congress to add same-sex benefits to the pending immigration proposal. However, many conservative supporters of overhauling immigration – including conservative Roman Catholics and evangelicals – have warned that they might pull their support if same-sex marriage is in the package.
Court watchers think it’s highly unlikely that the US Supreme Court will uphold Section 3 of DOMA, but you never know what the court might do. Especially this court.
The Defense of Marriage Act is under siege once again in California. A lesbian couple is challenging the law in District Court. Equality on Trial reports:
