Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
see post above for federal benefits denied to gay couples in mass...
You might want to actually read DOMA. As I said, it does not apply to the federal government, it only applies to "State, territory, or possession of the United States, or Indian tribe..." that do not already recognize same-sex marriages. If a "State, territory, or possession of the United States, or Indian tribe..." already recognizes same-sex marriages, then DOMA does not apply.
I'd like to know how someone with such unsound legal reasoning abilities ever got to be an assistant DA, much less attorney general of an entire state.
You might want to actually read DOMA. As I said, it does not apply to the federal government, it only applies to "State, territory, or possession of the United States, or Indian tribe..." that do not already recognize same-sex marriages. If a "State, territory, or possession of the United States, or Indian tribe..." already recognizes same-sex marriages, then DOMA does not apply.
Um, DOMA does apply at the federal level. It changes federal code. Here's section 3 of DOMA:
SEC. 3. DEFINITION OF MARRIAGE.
(a) In General.--Chapter 1 of title 1, United States Code, is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``Sec. 7. Definition of `marriage' and `spouse'
``In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any
ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative
bureaus and agencies of the United States, the word `marriage' means
only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife,
and the word `spouse' refers only to a person of the opposite sex who is
a husband or a wife.''.
The Massachusetts attorney general and the activists working with her are doing a very smart thing here. She's arguing the unconstitutionality of Section 3 of DOMA which defines marriage on a federal level. I believe that gives her, as well as many other Americans, standing.
Also, the case will not even touch on Section 2 of DOMA or the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the constitution. If her current attack on the law fails, it still leaves the option to bring another suit (a much stronger one in my opinion) based on the unconstitutionality of Section 2 of DOMA.
HER state's economy has seen an "economic benefit" because of gay marriage. Perhaps its because homosexuals from all over the place flocked to Mass. when they were given the green light? Demand will even out as more states pass pro-gay marriage legislation, don't you think? I'm not buying the economic benefits argument simply because it's a short-term benefit that will equalize once the initial rush is over.
The benefits will decrease, but the bottom line is that if a state is offering marriage licenses to a greater number of couples, revenues from marriage licenses will increase. The biggest gain, probably, is from revenue generated by all of the other things that go along with most weddings: the planning, the clothes, the food, the photographers, etc.
Be careful what you wish for when you "hope" for a SCOTUS ruling. If they close the door on the issue, it's closed. I'm not a gay marriage advocate by any stretch of the imagination, but it would seem that fighting the small fights along the way, and hoping for a good outcome, is better than fighting one big fight only to have the door slammed in your face for good.
The Supreme Court has reversed many of its own decisions. Even if it doesn't work out this time around, that could change in the future.
No they are not, because there are no "federal benefits" for married couples, nor does DOMA apply to the federal government, only the states.
That's not true. There are many tax breaks and benefits from the federal government for married couples (Social Security, for example). DOMA does apply to the federal government. That's why married same-sex couples have to file their federal tax returns as if they are single. It's also the reason why, until very recently, it was believed that the Census Bureau would not count married same-sex couples as married.
The Supreme Court has reversed many of its own decisions. Even if it doesn't work out this time around, that could change in the future.
While I would love to see it happen now or in the future, and yes, SCOTUS has reversed itself before, I would rather not have to fight two fights on this score. If it went before them now, we would lose because the court is not stacked in our favor at this time. As my SO just said on the phone to me, in order for us to win now we'd have to hope for an unfortunate and untimely death or two - harsh but true. At some point we're going to have to fight at a SCOTUS level. We all know it. But, if we lose the first time the second bite at the apple will take god only knows how long.
The Full Faith & Credit Clause of the US Constitution requires every state to acknowledge the public acts (which includes marriage) of every other state. It does not require any other state to adopt same-sex marriage, but for those states that do, those marriages must be recognized as legal in every other state.
It does not require them to acknowledge or enforce the laws of other states that are in contravention of their own laws. About the only type of law that is recognized regardless are court judgments, and even then one state is not required to enforce a judgment made in another state, only to honor it. States have a lot more latitude to disregard laws of other states that contravene their own statutory law.
Um, DOMA does apply at the federal level. It changes federal code.
When was the last time the federal government married anyone? Or name just one public act the federal government undertakes? You can't, because they don't and never did. Marriage is a public act that only State governments, US territorial governments, and other US possessions can apply, not the federal government.
The MA AG has no standing and her case will be tossed before it is ever heard.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
