The Daily Scoop: NY Fed Judge Finds DOMA Unconstitutional

While this is encouraging seeing one more federal judge find the Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional, it is also odd reading her reasoning. It interferes with the states’ rights to make determinations about domestic relations. Until the the late 1960’s many states had laws against interracial relationships and marriages. The Supreme Court ruled these laws unconstitutional in 1967. Given the history and the active banning of gay marriage in many states, have the states themselves shown they are not all that capable of ensuring those rights to equality provided within the US Constitution?  




A Federal judge in New York has joined several other judges across the country in striking down a section of the “Defense of Marriage Act” or DOMA that denies benefits to married same-sex couples.

Judge Barbara Jones ruled Wednesday in a case brought in federal court in Manhattan by a woman whose partner died in 2009. She awarded $353,000 to the plaintiff, Edith Windsor.

Lawyers for Windsor had argued that the law violates the equal protection guarantee of the U.S. Constitution.

The judge said the law fails because it tries to reexamine the states’ decisions concerning same-sex marriage. She said such a sweeping review interferes with a system of government that places matters at the core of the domestic relations law exclusively within the province of the states.

Read more….

4 Comments to “The Daily Scoop: NY Fed Judge Finds DOMA Unconstitutional”

  1. It’s really sad to watch, as a heterosexual male, that in a country that was founded on the escape of persecution and the liberty of the People’s rights, a fight against an act that removes a right to a portion of our community. I have friends that are Gay and they have just as stable relationships as many married opposite sex couples. In fact I’ve seen many opposite sex couples that should never have been allowed to marry let alone have children.

    The Defense of Marriage Act is a travesty, it is no different from segregation and it is a hate campaign by bigots that use their religious feelings to defend something that is a misconception. Marriage is not a religious act yet they treat it as if it is something defined by the Bible when the act of marriage was until the last couple of hundred years merely an informal arrangement except for the elite in society. A husband and wife were merely married through common law and was a case of being ‘shacked up’ for an extended time until people thought of them as being a joined couple.

    Now we have the religious zealots or rather the conservative far right using it as a method of expressing their bigotry, if it’s not women then it is the Homosexual community that they are directing their venom against.

    • You’re right. So much of this opposition to gay marriage is undefensible. Much of it is rooted in religion. Based just on that, there is no legal argument they can make. If a court allows such arguments then as we all know, it is effectively siding with one religion.

      It will be interesting once this makes it to the Supreme Court and the judges ask if there is any argument from the opposition that ISN’T based on religious beliefs. If they say no, then the case should be dismissed right there.

  2. Take a moment and ask yourself why “religion” is anti-gay. It is simply a matter of procreative success. Gay people do not increase the numbers of the “faithful” consequently they are to be shunned. This is not about morality; it is about power. The faith with the most followers wins.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: