DOMA

  • May 10, 2012
    Guest Post

    By Paul M. Smith, Partner, Jenner & Block. Mr. Smith successfully challenged the constitutionality of sodomy laws in the landmark Supreme Court opinion, Lawrence v. Texas, and is a former chair of the ACS Board.


    It takes no great insight to say that President Obama’s announcement of support for equal marriage rights for same-sex couples reflected, in part, mounting political pressure on the president. As Adam Nagourney said in Thursday’s New York Times, the president “was at risk of seeming politically timid and calculating, standing at the sidelines while a large number of Americans – including members of  both parties – embraced gay marriage.”  In fact, it became clear the campaign had misjudged the politics of this issue. Experience was showing it was close to impossible for Mr. Obama to talk with core members of his base without facing the same awkward question over and over – when are you going to get done “evolving” on the issue of equal marriage rights?  That said, it does seem over the top for the Log Cabin Republicans to call the announcement “offensive and callous” on the same day when so many others, gay and straight, were inspired by the fact that a sitting president had moved so far toward advocating complete equality for LGBT citizens.

    The more interesting question is why the original decision to avoid this issue until after the election proved to be so wrong. After all, candidates avoid controversial issues all the time when voters and the press will allow it. The answer is in part that the issue of equal marriage rights is constantly being brought up this year as a result of referenda that will occur in four states in November (not to mention the vote just held in North Carolina) as well as the Prop 8 and DOMA lawsuits. 

  • February 23, 2012

    by Jeremy Leaming

    Maryland lawmakers late today voted to join seven other states and the District of Columbia in legalizing same-sex marriage. The marriage equality measure, sponsored by Gov. Martin O’Malley (D), will now likely face voters, since religious rights special interests in the state have promised to work to drag the measure, the Civil Marriage Protection Act, before voters this fall.

    One of the Senate’s leaders said the bill would end discrimination against same-sex couples and their families, and that it would not impact straight marriages. He said it was time to end state-sanctioned discrimination and allow gays and lesbians to wed. Another senator noted that this was not the first time the General Assembly had altered the civil right of marriage, noting that in the late 1960s it invalidated a ban on interracial marriage.

    Following debate, which included many allusions to religion and “traditional” marriage, the Md. Senate passed the bill by a vote of 25 – 22. With the promise of O’Malley’s signature, likely to happen tomorrow, Maryland will become the eighth state to legalize same-sex marriage. The District of Columbia also recognizes same-sex marriage.  Like marriage equality laws in New York and Washington, the Maryland measure includes an exemption for houses of worship, meaning they will not be under a legal obligation to perform same-sex marriages or allow their facilities to be used for the marriages.

    In an interview yesterday with one of the nation’s best gay reporters, Michelangelo Signorile, O’Malley (pictured) said he is confident a consensus has emerged in support of marriage equality. “There’s been an evolution in the broadest sense among the people of our state,” O’Malley said. He added that “people have come to realize that the way forward, among people of many different faiths, is always through the greater and broader respect for equal rights for all.”

    UCLA law school professor Adam Winkler examines another major win for marriage equality in a piece for The Huffington Post. Winkler notes that earlier this week a federal judge appointed by President George W. Bush ruled that the so-called Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) is unconstitutional.

  • November 10, 2011

    by Jeremy Leaming

    While it is unlikely to be replicated in the Republican-controlled House of Representatives, lawmakers on the Senate side took a step toward repealing the so-called Defense of Marriage Act or DOMA, the federal law that discriminates against lesbians and gay men.

    The Senate Judiciary Committee votied in support of the Respect for Marriage Act, which would repeal DOMA. Before today’s vote, Democrats rallied around marriage equality, while several Republicans decried the Committee's action as political posturing, and all voted against the repeal bill.

    Sen. Dianne Feinstein, who introduced the measure earlier this year, knocked DOMA, calling it “wrong when it passed in 1996 and it is wrong now. There are 131,000 legally married couples in this country who are denied more than 1,100 federal rights and protections because of this discriminatory law. I don’t know long the battle for full equality will take, but we are on the cusp of change, and today’s historic vote in the committee is an important step forward.”

    Committee Chairman Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) blasted DOMA for denying equal treatment to gay couples. “The Federal Government should not deny recognition and protection to the thousands of Americans who are lawfully married under their state law. We must repeal DOMA to ensure the freedom and equality of all our citizens.”

    Sens. Charles Schumer, Richard Durbin, Al Franken, Christopher Coons and Blumenthal, also weighed in on the side of marriage equality. See some of their comments here.

    Republican Sen. John Cornyn, chided the Committee for moving the bill to the Senate floor where it would not be voted on “this year or next,” as The Huffington Post reports. According to Cornyn, today’s action was all about political maneuvering for next year’s general election.

  • July 28, 2011
    Video Interview

    by Jeremy Leaming

    Beyond the most recent high-profile state legislative victories for marriage equality, there are “huge advancements that have been made in terms of [court] doctrine regarding sexual orientation law,” North Carolina University law school professor Holning S. Lau told ACSblog.

    Lau, a panel participant at the ACS 10th Anniversary National Convention, said that until recently “there was virtually no precedent to be cited for the proposition that sexual orientation discrimination should be subject to heightened scrutiny -- this idea that sexual orientation is a suspect or quasi-suspect status. But over the past few years, we’ve seen a crystallization of jurisprudence to support that point. The high courts of California, Iowa, Connecticut, have all issued opinions saying that sexual orientation is either a quasi-suspect or suspect status."

    He continued, “We saw the same conclusion reached in Perry v. Schwarzenegger [the 2010 federal court opinion invalidating California’s anti-gay marriage law, Proposition 8], in Eric Holder’s memo on DOMA [the federal anti-gay marriage law]. And that’s been huge, because prior to this burgeoning of jurisprudence on this point, a lot of courts concluded in the opposite direction.”

    So while a few state legislatures, most dramatically, the New York legislature, have come through in favor of marriage equality, there is a slowly developing body of jurisprudence that looks promising for the advancement of equality for the LGBT community.

    “We’ve seen the jurisprudence really reach a new point,” Lau said, “and there is good case law, persuasive case law, in many instances … case law that courts can make use of to support the idea that sexual orientation discrimination should be subject to heightened scrutiny.”

    Earlier this month, Professor Scott Lemieux wrote, in a piece for The American Prospect, that the LGBT community must not forgo the courts in seeking full equality. All options must be used in securing equality, he wrote.

    Watch video of Lau’s entire interview below or download it as a video podcast. The video is also available here.

  • July 20, 2011

    by Jeremy Leaming

    TMPMuckraker provides video of Sen. Al Franken’s takedown of Tom Minnery of the Religious Right group, Focus on the Family, during today’s Senate Judiciary Committee’s consideration of bill to repeal the so-called Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). DOMA, which bars states from recognizing same-sex marriages, was passed during the Clinton administration, and is facing legal challenges in the federal court system.

    Minnery and Focus on the Family, longtime opponents of marriage equality, argue that gay marriages are a serious affront to Christian fundamentalists’ take on marriage, are bound to destroy the institution of marriage, and, by the way, gay couples can’t raise families. At the hearing today, Minnery mangled a Department of Health and Human Services study that he said proves that children are better “living with their biological and/or adopted mothers and fathers” as opposed to children in other types of families.

    Franken pointed out the study said no such thing, and added, “I don’t really know how we can trust the rest of your testimony if you are reading studies this way.”

    The White House announced yesterday that it was “proud to support the Respect for Marriage Act,” which would repeal DOMA. The repeal bill was introduced by Sen. Dianne Feinstein and Rep. Jerrod Nadler.