|| News ||
1 2 NEXT  Page 1 of 2

DOMA Challenge in Court Today


DOMA MOAKLEY 1 X390 (FAIR USE) | ADVOCATE.COM

On Thursday morning the federal district court in Boston will hear oral arguments on the constitutionality of the federal Defense of Marriage Act in Gill v. Office of Personnel Management.

The case, brought by Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders, challenges Section 3 of DOMA, which prevents the federal government from recognizing same-sex marriages. The case does not extend to whether individual states can recognize same-sex marriages.

On behalf of seven married same-sex couples and three widowers, GLAD attorney Mary L. Bonatuo will argue that the section of DOMA violates the federal constitutional guarantee of equal protection as applied to federal income taxation, Social Security benefits, and federal employee and retiree benefits.

“We think it’s actually really simple,” GLAD executive director Lee Swislow told The Advocate moments before heading to the court Thursday morning. “The government has carved out one set of legally married couples and excluded them from the federal benefits that every other legally married couple gets. Throughout its history, the federal government has always respected the state definition of marriage. But for same-sex couples, they’re making the decision. We say there is a clear violation of equal protection.”

The federal government, which has filed a motion to dismiss the case, calls the 1996 law discriminatory in its brief and concedes that the Obama administration is seeking repeal. However, the government says it is not discriminatory to maintain the status quo while the issue gets resolved. (Story continued on next page)

Follow us on Twitter Follow us on Twitter. Follow us on Facebook Follow us on Facebook. 1 2 NEXT  Page 1 of 2
Reader Comments
  • Name: wafuu
    Date posted: 5/6/2010 4:23:25 PM
    Hometown: japan

    Comment:

    I don't know how you could watch this video and not be moved, recognizing the injustice of DOMA.

  • Name: jay
    Date posted: 5/6/2010 3:19:33 PM
    Hometown: boston

    Comment:

    Federal Courthouse Evacuated No Injuries Reported BOSTON -- The Moakley federal courthouse in Boston was evacuated Thursday morning after an alarm sounded, but it was unclear what caused the alarm. Workers were asked to leave the building as emergency crews investigated. No one was reported injured. Are they afraid we may actually have a case?

  • Name: BX
    Date posted: 5/6/2010 2:17:02 PM
    Hometown: Charlotte

    Comment:

    Oh please John, crawl back under your bridge. We're not going to fall for your troll shit anymore. You can try to rattle our cages for your amusement, but we're not taking your skanky bait. We have better things to accomplish. Oh..take a few spelling lessons.

  • Name: Joseph
    Date posted: 5/6/2010 1:53:19 PM
    Hometown: Montgomery, AL

    Comment:

    Furthermore, John, marriage was originally limited to the wealthy and the nobility and love had no business in the process. The traditional marriage also was more often than not an arranged marriage (in which the to-be-married couple might be "engaged" for well over a decade before ever meeting each other--and that first meeting could easily take place on the wedding day). Then, you had the fact that marriage was largely for matters of inheritance; the wife's sole duty was to provide a legitimate heir for the husband (who could be having affairs with as many women as he wanted). Wives and their resulting children were nothing more than the man's property, to do with as he wished. (Somehow, I don't even think the most right-wing women who oppose same-sex marriage want to turn the clock back that far in their "defense of marriage.")

  • Name: Joseph
    Date posted: 5/6/2010 1:47:51 PM
    Hometown: Montgomery, AL

    Comment:

    John, you're an ignorant tub of lard. You flatly state what YOU think marriage should be, but there should be a LEGITIMATE and PLAUSIBLE reason as to WHY. The ONLY reason that would demand marriage as being one man/one woman is for procreation, but that would then deny the rights of infertile couples or senior couples from marrying (okay, a 75 year old man can still father a child but there aren't many women over the age of 50 who have successful NATURAL pregnancies--but if you're going to allow "unnatural" methods to be part of the fertilization process and pregnancy for senior couples, you somewhat invalidate your argument for marriage).

  • Name: republicanblack
    Date posted: 5/6/2010 1:38:56 PM
    Hometown: palm bay

    Comment:

    When NOBAMA was running everyone was concerned about him ruining the courts with his picks. Well what do we have here. A republican choice judge choosing to side with BIG business. What a surprise. And with this abortion thing it is only a way to divide and conquer the people -- and here I was worrying about abortion. What does abortion matter when the supreme court says a corp can spend unlimited amounts of cash on campaigns, I gotta get a grip.. check out this story search "Who will Obama NOT nominate wendy phiillips"

  • Name: John
    Date posted: 5/6/2010 1:25:19 PM
    Hometown: Wayland

    Comment:

    This Law, passed by Bill Clinton, is a necessary law. Where everything that is sacred is being eroded and torn down, it was inportant for his administration, and everyone after that to, as crazy as it sounds, define for todays alternate lifestyles what marriage. I can't beleive it took a law to do that, but Clinton did the right thing, and he was commended for it then, and we need to leave it alone, other lifestyles are just that, and should not be included in this Law. The Law was designed to exclude any variation of what marriage is...a union between a Man and a Woman....

  • Name: Ed C
    Date posted: 5/6/2010 12:55:26 PM
    Hometown: CA

    Comment:

    I found some sources, although there appears to be no internet inside the courthouse: On twitter, follow @GLADLaw or search #DOMA

  • Name: Paul
    Date posted: 5/6/2010 12:38:04 PM
    Hometown: East Haven, CT

    Comment:

    Right! Everyone has been silent on this, like it doesn't matter. Not even a mention that GLADD has asked for a summary judgement without a trial...will Obama defend the position - that's the story here!!!

  • Name: Ed C
    Date posted: 5/6/2010 10:21:44 AM
    Hometown: CA

    Comment:

    Is anyone blogging/tweeting from this trial?



Don't Miss
  • Best of Broadway Smash: Why You Will Love It

    Craig Zadan and Neil Meron, two of the producers of NBC’s new critically acclaimed musical series, explain why the backstage drama of creating a musical about Marilyn Monroe has mass appeal and why big stars like Anjelica Huston, Uma Thurman, Bernadette Peters, and Nick Jonas were eager to appear in it.

  • Best of Broadway How Broadway Does a Flea Market

    Find out why actress Kathleen Chalfant calls the annual Flea Market and Grand Auction in Times Square "the most glamorous flea market you've ever seen." It raised half a million dollars to fight HIV/AIDS.

  • Travel Slideshow Flag Gayest Cities in America, 2012

    It's no secret that megalopolises New York City, Chicago, and Los Angeles have robust LGBT life — and we've even heard tell of little queer hoods like the Castro and P-Town. This isn't that list.

 
 
Advocate Subscribe Promo Banner 300x50
 
Follow Us Follow Us on FacebookFollow Us on TwitterSubscribe to our RSS feedsDownload our app
Facebook Activity
 
1056 COVER X135 | ADVOCATE.COM
Today's Headlines