This post was contributed by a community member. The views expressed here are the author's own.

Health & Fitness

In a 5 to 4 Decision, the U.S. Supreme Court Strikes Down The Federal Defense of Marriage Act, Holding It a Violation of Fifth Amendment Rights to Due Process.

This morning the United States Supreme Court stuck down the Defense of Marriage Act. This law, passed in 1996, denied federal benefits to legally married same-sex couples. Justice Anthony Kennedy write the majority opinion. A copy of the decision is here.

The case dealt with Spyer and Windsor, a same sex couple who were in a relationship since 1963 and were married in Canada in 2007. The marriage was also recognized in New York, where they lived, by virtue of New York law. When Spyer died, she left her entire estate to Windsor. The federal estate taxes owed were over $353,000. The couple did not qualify for the Federal Estate Tax exemption for property that passes to a spouse. 

The same set of circumstances exists in Pennsylvania where the Inheritance Tax rate for property passing to a spouse is 0%, but 15% for property passing between a same-sex couple. 

The Court in it's opinion noted that DOMA as it existed affected over 1,000 other federal statutes and regulations that confer federal benefits to people. These include health care benefits, rights under the bankruptcy law, social security benefits, tax benefits. the right to be buried in a Veteran's Cemetery, and many more. 

The U.S. Supreme Court noted that although there were some federal statutes that concern marriage, that is traditionally, and legally, a topic for state laws. That is, state law determines whether a marriage is valid. State laws also regulate divorce and other marriage rights. The Court held that the purpose of DOMA was for the Federal Government to demean those who were in valid same sex marriages recognized by their state, and for that reason was unconstitutional.

This court did not address the question of whether every state in the U.S. was required to recognize same sex marriages performed in another state. In fact, the ruling leaves in place laws throughout the nation, including Pennsylvania, that ban same sex marriages. The Court expressly stated "The class to which DOMA directs its restrictions and restraints are those persons who are joined in same-sex marriages made lawful by the State."
 
The second case before the U. S. Supreme Court dealing with same-sex marriages, Hollingsworth v. Perry, was sent back to the state court without a decision by them.  This case dealt with California's ruling on same-sex marriages and the U.S. Supreme Court stated that was a decision to be made by the state. The California Supreme Court held that it was a violation of the California Constitution to deny same sex couples the right to marry. California voters reacted by amending the California Constitution to deny the right to same sex marriages (Proposition 8). The issue before the U.S. Supreme Court was whether there is a federal constitutional right too a same-sex marriage. In a decision that seems to be consistent with it's first decision on DOMA, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to decide that issue, saying the case should not have been before them, and belongs in the California Courts. 

The attorneys on an ABA sponsored list serv to which I subscribe are asking questions such as these: How is marriage defined federally going forward?  Are you married if your state says you are married?  Are you married if *any* state says you are married?  Are you married if another country says you are married?  Will it it be that a couple married in Massachusetts will still not be married for federal purposes if they move to Texas? Look for more litigation in this area in the years ahead.

Stay well until the next post.

Bob Gasparro

Bob Gasparro is an Elder Practitioner (accountant and attorney). He can be reached at Robert.Gasparro@lifespanlegal.com or (484) 297-2050. Comments to this post, and ideas for future posts are welcome.

Find out what's happening in Mediawith free, real-time updates from Patch.

We’ve removed the ability to reply as we work to make improvements. Learn more here

The views expressed in this post are the author's own. Want to post on Patch?