| . |
| . |
| . |
www.ambiente.us JULY| JULIO 2010
Federal judge | DOMA is unconstitutional
A U.S. judge in Boston has ruled that a federal gay marriage
ban is unconstitutional because it interferes with the right of a
state to define marriage.
BOSTON (AP) - A U.S. judge in Boston has ruled that a federal gay marriage ban is
unconstitutional because it interferes with the right of a state to define marriage.
U.S. District Judge Joseph Tauro on Thursday ruled in favor of gay couples' rights in
two separate challenges to the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act, known as DOMA.
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.
"The federal government, by enacting and enforcing DOMA, plainly encroaches upon
the firmly entrenched province of the state, and in doing so, offends the Tenth
Amendment. For that reason, the statute is invalid," Tauro wrote in a ruling in a lawsuit
filed by Attorney General Martha Coakley.
Federal judge | DOMA is unconstitutional
A U.S. judge in Boston has ruled that a federal gay marriage
ban is unconstitutional because it interferes with the right of a
state to define marriage.
BOSTON (AP) - A U.S. judge in Boston has ruled that a federal gay marriage ban is
unconstitutional because it interferes with the right of a state to define marriage.
U.S. District Judge Joseph Tauro on Thursday ruled in favor of gay couples' rights in
two separate challenges to the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act, known as DOMA.
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.
"The federal government, by enacting and enforcing DOMA, plainly encroaches upon
the firmly entrenched province of the state, and in doing so, offends the Tenth
Amendment. For that reason, the statute is invalid," Tauro wrote in a ruling in a lawsuit
filed by Attorney General Martha Coakley.
LGBT/Latino/Hispanic Civil Rights unitycoalition.org |
| . AMBIENTE ONLINE STORE |
Fresh-Squeezed Paradise MIAMI RIVER INN miamiriverinn.com |
FLOWERS|ART ESSENTIALS flowerbardesign.com |
UC|CU MEMBER DISCOUNT CARD |
WORDS & IMAGES MATTER. Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation glaad.org |
SHOP AT THE DOT MDGLCC Members offer some great discounts & specials. |
Ruling in a separate case filed by Gays & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders, Tauro found
that DOMA violates the equal protection clause of the U.S. Constitution.
"We've maintained from the very beginning that there was absolutely no basis for this law
treating one class of married Massachusetts couples different from everybody else and the
court has recognized that," said Gary Buseck, GLAD's legal director.
The Justice Department argued the federal government has the right to set eligibility
requirements for federal benefits - including requiring that those benefits only go to
couples in marriages between a man and a woman.
The law was enacted by Congress in 1996 when it appeared Hawaii would soon legalize
same-sex marriage and opponents worried that other states would be forced to recognize
such marriages. The lawsuit challenges only the portion of the law that prevents the federal
government from affording pension and other benefits to same-sex couples.
Since then, five states and the District of Columbia have legalized gay marriage.
Copyright © Associated Press & MBIENTE MAGAZINE. Do not reproduce without citing this source