Federal gay marriage ban is ruled unconstitutional

[defendandprotect]

Federal gay marriage ban is ruled unconstitutional

By DENISE LAVOIE, AP Legal Affairs Writer Denise Lavoie, Ap Legal Affairs Writer – 1 hr 36 mins ago
BOSTON – The federal law

banning gay marriage is unconstitutional because it interferes with the right of a state to define the institution and therefore denies married gay couples some federal benefits, a federal judge ruled Thursday in Boston.

U.S. District Judge Joseph Tauro ruled in favor of gay couples' rights in two separate challenges to the Defense of Marriage Act, known as DOMA, a 1996 law that the Obama administration has argued for repealing. The rulings apply to Massachusetts but could have broader implications if they're upheld on appeal.

The state had argued the law denied benefits such as

Medicaid to gay married couples in Massachusetts, where same-sex unions have been legal since 2004.

Tauro agreed and said the act forces Massachusetts to discriminate against its own citizens in order to be eligible for federal funding in federal-state partnerships.

The act "plainly encroaches" upon the right of the state to determine marriage, Tauro said in his ruling on a lawsuit filed by

state Attorney General Martha Coakley. In a ruling in a separate case filed by Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders, Tauro ruled the act violates the equal protection clause of the U.S. Constitution.

"Congress undertook this classification for the one purpose that lies entirely outside of legislative bounds, to disadvantage a group of which it disapproves. And such a classification the Constitution clearly will not permit," Tauro wrote.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100708/ap_on_re_us/us_gay_marriage_benefits



-------------

GREAT TO SEE SOMETHING REAL HAPPENING --

Nice contrast to the homophobia usually on display!!!

[dixiegrrrrl]

1. Hooray !!!!!!!!!!1

[aquart]

2. So God had a more important thing for Martha Coakley to do.

Hosanna in the highest.

[peacebird]

3. does this mean the Feds can't protect rights for same sex marriage?

The act "plainly encroaches" upon the right of the state to determine marriage, Tauro said


That sounds to me like the states can ban same sex marriage at will?

[aquart]

4. Are you attempting to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory?

[peacebird]

9. no, not at all....

[defendandprotect]

7. "All are equal" . . . can't be about separate but equal . . .!!

[Liberal In Texas]

5. I posted this nearly 2 hours ago.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8713317

3 responses.

[defendandprotect]

8. Trust mods will come and combine them . . . ???

[xchrom]

6. Recommend - the decision seems to have

Good and bad in it.

Is there 'equal protection' any where in sight?