|
In a 3-0 decision, the First US Circuit Court of Appeals hasdeclared a portion of the Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional.The 1996 law passed by wide margins in both houses of Congress andwas signed into law by President Bill Clinton. The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, MassachusettsCatholic Conference, and several other religious organizations hadfiled friend-of-the-court briefs in defense of the act sconstitutionality, as had various organizations and individuals,including the attorneys general of five states, the Thomas MoreSociety, and Professor Robert George of Princeton University.Numerous associations, unions, and religious organizations,including the American Psychological Association, the NationalEducation Association, and the Anti-Defamation League, had filedbriefs asking the court to declare the law unconstitutional. Congress denial of federal benefits to same-sex coupleslawfully married in Massachusetts has not been adequately supportedby any permissible federal interest, the court stated in itsdecision. DOMA does not formally invalidate same-sex marriages instates that permit them, but its adverse consequences for such achoice are considerable. Notably, it prevents same-sex marriedcouples from filing joint federal tax returns, which can lessen taxburdens, and prevents the surviving spouse of a same-sex marriagefrom collecting Social Security survivor benefits. In reaching our judgment, we do not rely upon the charge thatDOMA's hidden but dominant purpose was hostility tohomosexuality, the court added. The many legislators whosupported DOMA acted from a variety of motives, one central andexpressed aim being to preserve the heritage of marriage astraditionally defined over centuries of Western civilization. To conclude, many Americans believe that marriage is the union ofa man and a woman, and most Americans live in states where that isthe law today, the court continued. One virtue of federalism isthat it permits this diversity of governance based on local choice,but this applies as well to the states that have chosen to legalizesame-sex marriage. Under current Supreme Court authority, Congress'denial of federal benefits to same-sex couples lawfully married inMassachusetts has not been adequately supported by any permissiblefederal interest. The court did not strike down Section 2 of the Defense of MarriageAct, which declares that no State, territory, or possession ofthe United States, or Indian tribe, shall be required to giveeffect to any public act, record, or judicial proceeding of anyother State, territory, possession, or tribe respecting arelationship between persons of the same sex that is treated as amarriage under the laws of such other State, territory, possession,or tribe, or a right or claim arising from such relationship. The e-commerce company in China offers quality products such as Glass Separator Pads , Wiring Harness Machine Manufacturer, and more. For more , please visit Polyurethane Adhesive Sealant today!
Related Articles -
Glass Separator Pads, Wiring Harness Machine Manufacturer,
|
