Advertisement
IN THE NEWS
Doma
FEATURED ARTICLES ABOUT DOMA - PAGE 2
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
March 27, 2013 |
The U.S. Supreme Court appears likely to strike down the federal Defense of Marriage Act, which bars federal recognition of same-sex marriages, a gay rights lawyer said Wednesday. Kate Kendell, executive director of the National Center for Lesbian Rights, said after attending the court's hearing that she believed there were five justices willing to rule on the constitutionality of the federal law. “By June, DOMA will be history,” Kendell said. FULL COVERAGE: Same-sex marriage ban She said the justices appeared more relaxed during the hearing on the federal law than they had been Tuesday in the arguments over Proposition 8, California's ban on same-sex marriage.
Advertisement
NEWS
March 27, 2013 |
WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court wrapped up a second day of arguments on gay marriage, as Justice Anthony M. Kennedy and the court's liberal justices appeared headed toward striking down the part of the Defense of Marriage Act that denies federal benefits to legally married gay couples. Kennedy repeatedly said the states, not the federal government, have the primary role in deciding who is married. The question is “whether the federal government has the authority to regulate marriage,” he said.
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
March 27, 2013 |
Some members of the U.S. Supreme Court appeared concerned Wednesday that a federal law barring recognition of same-sex marriages interfered with state rights, a law professor said. Loyola law professor Dougles NeJaime, after reading a transcript of Wednesday's hearing on the Defense of Marriage Act, said it suggested the court might rule in favor of gay rights but on the grounds the federal law improperly exerted control over the states. NeJaime said Justice Anthony Kennedy, whose vote is considered pivotal in gay rights cases, clearly seemed skeptical of the law. The section being challenged denies federal benefits to spouses of same-sex couples.
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
March 27, 2013
As the U.S. Supreme Court hears a second day of historic arguments on gay marriage, The Times will host a live video chat at 10 a.m. Wednesday with two leading legal experts and legal affairs reporter Maura Dolan. Those experts are John Eastman, a Chapman University constitutional law professor who supports California's Proposition 8 ban on same-sex marriage, and Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of the law school at UC Irvine and a constitutional law professor. Eastman told The Times on Tuesday that he was “cautiously optimistic” after listening to the arguments in the courtroom.
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
March 27, 2013 |
This post has been corrected. See the note at the bottom for details. Gay marriage proponents are riding into Wednesday's U.S. Supreme Court discussion about the Defense of Marriage Act on a wave of support from Proposition 8 debates a day earlier. The court Wednesday was hearing arguments on the legality of withholding tax and Social Security benefits from same-sex couples in states where gay marriages are legal. On Tuesday evening, gay marriage proponents and opponents of California's Proposition 8 rallied around the country.
OPINION
March 26, 2013 |
"Why don't you guys move home to the States?" my friends ask. "Because," I say, "although I am American, my partner is not, and because of DOMA, I can't sponsor him for a green card. " "But you're married. " TIMELINE: Gay marriage chronology "Technically, we're civil partnered, but immigration is a federal issue. It doesn't matter that individual states recognize my relationship with my husband or partner, or whatever I choose to call him. " "But that's unfair.
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
March 26, 2013 |
SAN FRANCISCO -- Backers of gay marriage expressed satisfaction with the arguments before the U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday, saying they believed the justices supported their position. Jon Davidson, legal director of Lambda Legal, a gay rights advocacy group, said the hearing assured him that California gays are likely to be permitted to marry again. He said the most devastating admission for the proponents came when Charles Cooper, the lawyer defending Proposition 8, which bans same-sex marriage in California, was asked whether there was any rational basis for treating gay people unequally in any setting, such as employment, other than in marriage.
OPINION
October 21, 2012
Last week the U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals in New York became the second federal appeals court to rule that Congress violated the Constitution when it limited the definition of "marriage" in federal law to the union of a man and a woman. The decision, which invalidates part of the Defense of Marriage Act, is a heartening one that should be affirmed by the Supreme Court. But some advocates of marriage equality worry that the decision, in a sense, might be too favorable. What concerns them, from a pragmatic perspective, is a finding by the appeals court that gays and lesbians constitute a "suspect class" - a politically marginalized group, like racial minorities, women and some others, that requires special protection under the law. Under long-standing Supreme Court precedent, laws that disadvantage those groups must be subjected to "heightened scrutiny" by the courts in determining whether they violate equal protection of the laws.
BUSINESS
January 28, 2013 |
One of the nation's leading gay-rights advocacy groups, the Human Rights Campaign, has formed a coalition of major companies calling for the repeal of the federal Defense of Marriage Act. It's no surprise, of course, that the HRC in Washington would use its considerable clout to organize big businesses to fight DOMA, the law that excludes recognition of same-sex marriages. What will be a surprise to many is that one of the first companies to join the effort was Marriott International Inc., which was founded by a devout Mormon, John Willard Marriott.
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
March 27, 2013 |
The day after hearing arguments over the constitutionality of California's ban on same-sex marriage, the Supreme Court will continue to wade into the issue of gay rights Wednesday as it hears a challenge to the federal Defense of Marriage Act. As Times reporter David Savage points out, the second chapter is about to begin. The court is scheduled to hear discussions on the federal law and whether some of its provisions, including tax benefits and Social Security payments, can be extended to gay couples who have married in states where same-sex marriage is legal.
