In 2004, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts became the first state to end the exclusion of same-sex couples from marriage..... Congress’s decision to enact a federal definition of marriage rejected the long-standing practice of deferring to each state's definition of marriage and contravened the constitutional designation of exclusive authority to the states. From its founding until DOMA was enacted in 1996, the federal government recognized that defining marital status was the exclusive prerogative of the states and an essential aspect of each state's sovereignty, and consistently deferred to state definitions when the marital status of an individual was used as a marker of eligibility for rights or protections under federal law.The Boston Globe reports on the lawsuit. State Attorney General Martha Coakley's office has issued a press release along with links to a transcript and recording of yesterday's press conference announcing the action.
Now, because of Section 3 of DOMA, married individuals in same-sex relationships are both denied access to critically important rights and benefits and not held to the same obligations and responsibilities arising out of marriage or based on marital status. DOMA precludes same-sex spouses from a wide range of important protections that directly affect them and their families, including federal income tax credits, employment and retirement benefits, health insurance coverage, and Social Security payments. In enacting DOMA, Congress overstepped its authority, undermined states’ efforts to recognize marriages between same-sex couples, and codified an animus towards gay and lesbian people.
Objective coverage of church-state and religious liberty developments, with extensive links to primary sources.
Thursday, July 09, 2009
Massachusetts Sues Challenging Constitutionality of DOMA
Yesterday the state of Massachusetts filed suit in federal district court challenging the constitutionality of the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). The complaint (full text) in Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, (D MA, filed 7/8/2009), alleges that in enacting the law, the federal government violated the 10th Amendment and exceeded its powers under the Spending Clause. The complaint alleges in part: