National
BREAKING: Second Circuit latest to strike down DOMA
Anti-gay law ruled unconstitutional in 2-1 decision
The Second Circuit ruled that DOMA is unconstitutional against Edith Windsor‘s legal challenge against the law (Washington Blade file photo by Michael Key)
A federal appeals court has ruled the Defense of Marriage Act is unconstitutional in case filed by a New York widow who’s challenging the statute on the basis that it unfairlyĀ forced her to pay $363,000 in estate taxes.
In a 2-1 decision, the U.S. Second Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against Section 3 of DOMA on the basis that it violates equal protection under the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
The majority opinion came fromĀ Chief Judge Dennis Jacobs, who wrote the decision, and Judge Christopher Droney. Judge Chester StraubĀ dissented by asserting DOMA is constitutional.
“DOMAās classification of same-sex spouses was notĀ substantially related to an important government interest,” the decision states. “Accordingly, we hold that Section 3 of DOMA violates equalĀ protection and is therefore unconstitutional.”
The plaintiff in the lawsuit, which was filed by the American Civil Liberties Union, is 83-year-old lesbian Edith Windsor, who in 2009 had to pay $363,000 in estate taxes upon the death of her spouse, Thea Spyer, because DOMA prohibits the federal recognition of same-sex marriage.
In a statement, Windsor praised the Second Circuit for coming to the conclusion that DOMA is unconstitutional.
āThis law violated the fundamental American principle of fairness that we all cherish,ā Windsor said. āI know Thea would have been so proud to see how far we have come in our fight to be treated with dignity.ā
The decision means seven federal courts ā eight if a bankruptcy court ruling is included ā have now determined DOMA is unconstitutional at a time when numerous cases challenging the anti-gay law are pending for consideration before the U.S. Supreme Court. The high court hasn’t yet determined whether it will take up the constitutionality of DOMA, but is likely to do so. The Second Circuit is also the second appeals court to strike down DOMA. The First CircuitĀ ruled against the lawĀ in May.
The next step in the process is for House Republicans to appeal the decision either to the full Second Circuit or the Supreme Court, which has already been asked to take up the Windsor case along with several other DOMA cases. The high court will then decide the constitutionality of DOMA once and for all on a nationwide basis.
Susan Stenger, an appeals court attorney who’s handled LGBT rights cases for the Boston-based firm Burns & Levinson, said it’s unlikely DOMA proponents would pursue en banc review in the cases because so many other lawsuits against the anti-gay law are already pending before the Supreme Court.
“The fact that there’s a dissent [means] they might try en banc review, but also knowing that this will ultimately go to the Supreme Court, I would think they wouldn’t bother,” StengerĀ said. “Why waste time and resources when if an en banc changed anything, whomever lost would certainly appeal?”
Dennis, whoĀ was appointed by President George H.W. Bush, wrote the majority decision against DOMA even though he has reputation for being a conservative judge. Joining him was an Obama appointee, Droney. The dissenting judge, Straub, was appointed by former President Clinton.
In addition to ruling against DOMA, the judges determined the anti-gay law should be subject to heightened scrutiny, or a greater assumption that the law is unconstitutional. The Second Circuit is the first appeals court to determine that DOMA should be subject to this level of review.
Based on precedent the Supreme Court set in earlier court cases, the court offers four reasons ā including the history of discrimination faced by LGBT people ā Ā as reasons why DOMA should be subject to heightened scrutiny.
“In this case, all four factors justify heightened scrutiny: A) homosexuals as a group have historically endured persecution and discrimination; B) homosexuality has noĀ relation to aptitude or ability to contribute to society; C) homosexuals are a discernible group with non-obvious distinguishing characteristics, especially in the subset of those who enter same-sex marriages; and D) the class remains a politically weakened minority,” the decision states.
Douglas Nejaime, who’s gay and a law professor at Loyola Law School, called the Second Circuit’s decision to apply heightened scrutiny against DOMA “very significant” because it means the Supreme Court will have to weigh in on the matter in addition to the law itself.
“As a practical matter, this makes it even more difficult for the Supreme Court to avoid the question of heightened scrutiny,” NeJaime said. “If the Gill decision from the First Circuit was the only federal appellate decision striking down DOMA, the Court could have struck down DOMA ā upholding that decision ā without passing on the level-of-scrutiny question. But with the Second Circuitās decision in Windsor, the Court is more likely to address heightened scrutiny.”
NeJaime added that as a result of the Second Circuit application of heightened scrutiny, courts are now more likely to find state marriage bans unconstitutional as well as anti-gay laws related parental rights and public employment discrimination.
Notably, the decision rejects an argument proposed by private attorney Paul Clement ā who’s advocating on behalf of the anti-gay law for the House Republican-led Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group ā that Windsor’s caseĀ should be sent toĀ the New York Court of Appeals for certificationĀ because Spyer died at a time before New York legalized same-sex marriage.
The appeals court says certification is unnecessary because the New York Court of AppealsĀ has expressed a disinclination to decide the question and becauseĀ New Yorkās intermediate appellate courts are unanimous on the issue. At that time of Spyer’s death in 2009, Windsor’s marriage was recognized in New York by an executive order issued by then-Gov. David Paterson.
“Given the consistent view of these decisions, we see no need to seek guidance here,” the decision states. “Because Windsorās marriage would have been recognized under New York law at the time of Spyerās death, she has standing.”
The court also rejects an argument posed by Clement that the court should uphold DOMA because of precedent set by Baker v. Nelson, a 1972 case challenging Minnesota’s prohibition on same-sex marriage that the Supreme Court refused to hear for want of federal question.
Judges say Baker isn’t controlling because in the 40 years following the case there have beenĀ “manifold changes to the Supreme Courtās equal protection jurisprudence” and becauseĀ the lawsuits are distinct: Baker was about same-sex marriage within a state while the Windsor is about a federal law.
“After all, Windsor and Spyer were actually married in this case, at least in the eye of New York, where they lived,” the decision states. “Other courts have likewise concluded that Baker does not control equal protection review of DOMA for these reasons.”
James Esseks, director of theĀ ACLUĀ LGBT Project, shared in the jubilation that the court’s reasoning led the judges to rule against the anti-gay law.
āYet again, a federal court has found that it is completely unfair to treat married same-sex couples as though theyāre legal strangers,ā Esseks said. āEdie and Thea were there for each other in sickness and in health like any other married couple, and itās unfair for the government to disregard both their marriage and the life they built together and treat them like second-class citizens.ā
Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.), who was among the 144 House Democrats who signed a friend-of-the-court brief against DOMA in the Windsor case, also commended the judges for ruling in favor of a plaintiff who’s also his constituent.
āAs the amicus brief I spearheaded in this case pointed out, and as the court agreed, there is no justification for denying Edie Windsor the same right as all other spouses to her full inheritance without paying a tax penalty,ā Nadler said. āEdie lives in my congressional district, and was with her wife, Thea Spyer, for 44 years. The last thing she should have to worry about following the loss of her spouse is an unjust tax penalty imposed for no other reason than the fact that she and her wife were the same gender.”
In hisĀ dissenting opinion, StraubĀ dissents in part and concurs in part, saying he disagrees with the majority opinion that DOMA is unconstitutional and the legislative approach is the appropriate course of action for those who want it lifted from the books.
“The Congress and the President formalized in DOMA, for federal purposes, the basic human condition of joining a man and a woman in a long-term relationship and the only one which is inherently capable of producing another generation of humanity,” Straub writes. “Whether that understanding is to continue is for the American people to decide via their choicesĀ in electing the Congress and the President. It is not for the Judiciary to search for new standards by which to negate a rational expression of the nation via the Congress.”
StengerĀ said she thinks the dissent will have value “to the people who disagree” with the majority opinion to justify their position, but otherwise have little impact.
“The Supreme Court obviously studies all the detail of a dissent in making its own decision, so it may find something in there persuasive, but technically it has no impact,” StengerĀ said. “It may just give food-for-thought to somebody who’s inclined to go in that direction.”
NOTE: This post has been edited and updated to include more information and reaction to the Second Circuit ruling.
U.S. Supreme Court
Concern over marriage equality in US grows two decades after first Mass. same-sex weddings
Gay and lesbian couples began to marry in Bay State in 2004
Two decades after Massachusetts became the first state to legalize same-sex marriage, a new study reveals both significant progress and ongoing challenges for married LGBTQ couples in the U.S., with a growing sense of insecurity about the future of their rights.
The Williams Institute at UCLA School of Law surveyed 484 married same-sex couples from all 50 states and D.C. The study, released Monday, marks the 20th anniversary of legal same-sex marriage in the U.S.
Researchers found that 93 percent of respondents cited love as a primary reason for marrying, with 75 percent also mentioning legal protections. Over 83 percent reported positive changes in their sense of security, and 74.6 percent noted improved life satisfaction since marrying.
However, the study also highlighted persistent discrimination and growing concerns about the future. About 11 percent of couples who had a wedding reported facing prejudice during the planning process.
Alarmingly, nearly 80 percent of respondents expressed concern about the potential overturning of the 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges decision, which legalized same-sex marriage nationwide. This anxiety has been exacerbated by initiatives like Project 2025, a conservative policy blueprint that some fear could roll back LGBTQ rights if implemented.
The possibility of a former President Donald Trump victory in the upcoming election has further intensified these concerns. Many respondents cited Trump’s previous U.S. Supreme Court appointments and his statements on LGBTQ issues as reasons for their apprehension. One participant stated, “The thought of another Trump presidency keeps me up at night. We’ve come so far, but it feels like our rights could be stripped away at any moment.”
The current political climate has 29 percent of respondents considering moving to another state, with 52.9 percent citing socio-political concerns as a primary reason. This reflects a growing sense of insecurity among LGBTQ couples about their rights and freedoms.
Brad Sears, founding executive director of the Williams Institute, noted, “The data clearly show that marriage equality has had a profound positive impact on same-sex couples and their families. However, it also reveals ongoing challenges and serious concerns about the future of these rights in light of current political trends and the upcoming election.”
Christy Mallory, legal director at the Williams Institute and lead author of the study, added, “This research provides crucial insights into the lived experiences of same-sex couples two decades after marriage equality began in the U.S. The high level of concern about potential loss of rights underscores the continued importance of legal protections and public support for LGBTQ+ equality.”
The study found that 30 percent of surveyed couples have children, with 58.1 percent of those parents reporting that marriage provided more stability for their families. However, many of these families now worry about the security of their legal status in the face of potential policy changes and shifting political landscapes.
As the nation reflects on two decades of marriage equality, the study underscores both the transformative power of legal recognition and the ongoing need for vigilance in protecting LGBTQ+ rights. The findings highlight the complex reality faced by same-sex couples in America today: Celebrating hard-won progress while grappling with uncertainty about the future, particularly in light of upcoming political events and potential shifts in leadership.
State Department
State Department hosts meeting on LGBTQ rights and foreign policy
Event took place before Pride Month reception
Secretary of State Antony Blinken on Thursday hosted a group of LGBTQ activists and politicians from around the world at the State Department.
The event ā described as a “Convening on U.S. Foreign Policy: National Security, Inclusive Development, and the Human Rights of LGBTQI+ Persons” ā took place before the State Department’s annual Pride Month reception. Participants included:
ā¢ Jessica Stern, the special U.S. envoy for the promotion of LGBTQ and intersex rights
ā¢ U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Linda Thomas-Greenfield
ā¢ U.S. Trade Representative Katherine Tai
ā¢ U.S. Ambassador to India Eric Garcetti
ā¢ Suzanne Goldberg, senior advisor to the Under Secretary of State for Civil Security, Democracy, and Human Rights
ā¢ Under Secretary of State for Civilian Security, Democracy, and Human Rights Uzra Zeya
ā¢ U.S. Agency for International Development Senior LGBTQI+ Coordinator Jay Gilliam
ā¢ USAID Counselor Clinton D. White
ā¢ National Security Council Senior Director for Democracy and Human Rights Kelly Razzouk
ā¢ Assistant U.S. Secretary of Health Adm. Rachel Levine
ā¢ National Security Council Human Rights Director Jess Huber
ā¢ U.N. Assistant Secretary General for Human Rights Ilze Brandt Kehris
ā¢ Icelandic Ambassador to the U.S. BergdĆs EllertsdĆ³ttir
ā¢ Council for Global Equality Co-Executive Director Mark Bromley
ā¢ Outright International Senior Advisor for Global Intersex Rights Kimberly Zieselman
ā¢ Essy Adhiambo, executive director of the Institute for Equality and Non Discrimination in Kenya
ā¢ Pau GonzĆ”lez, co-chair of Hombres Trans PanamĆ” and PFLAG-PanamĆ”
“Forty-five years ago, thousands gathered in D.C. in what became the first national march for LGBTQI+, demanding their voices be heard,” said Thomas-Greenfield in a post to her X account that showed her speaking at the event. “We must continue to carry forward the spirit of these pioneers and fight for equal rights and dignity for all.”
Forty-five years ago, thousands gathered in DC in what became the first national march for LGBTQI+, demanding their voices be heard.
We must continue to carry forward the spirit of these pioneers and fight for equal rights and dignity for all. š³ļøāšš³ļøāā§ļø pic.twitter.com/oph2Ahmfhq
— Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield (@USAmbUN) June 28, 2024
President Joe Biden in 2021 signed a memo that committed the U.S. to promoting LGBTQ and intersex rights abroad as part of his administrationās overall foreign policy.
“LGBTQI+ rights are human rights,” said Blinken. “Our government has a responsibility to defend them, to promote them ā here and everywhere.”
Blinken noted consensual same-sex sexual relations remain criminalized in 64 countries, with the death penalty in 11 of them.
He specifically highlighted Uganda’s Anti-Homosexuality Act and Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor OrbĆ”n’s government’s “smearing scapegoating, stigmatizing LGBTQI+ persons ā vilifying them with degrading labels, denying them equal rights, normalizing violence against them.” (Gay U.S. Ambassador to Hungary David Pressman this month marched in the annual Budapest Pride parade.)
Blinken noted Iraqi MPs earlier this year “passed legislation that punishes same-sex relations with up to 15 years in prison.” He also pointed out that Indonesian lawmakers approved a new criminal code banning extramarital sex.
“In a nation where same-sex couples cannot marry, these laws effectively make all same-sex conduct illegal and they undermine privacy for all Indonesians,” said Blinken.
“Weāre defending and promoting LGBTQI+ rights around the world,” he said.
Blinken noted seven countries ā Barbados, St. Kitts and Nevis, Antigua and Barbuda, Dominica, Namibia, Singapore, the Cook Islands ā have decriminalized consensual same-sex sexual relations over the last two years. He also highlighted Greece, Liechtenstein, and Thailand this year extended marriage rights to same-sex couples, and other countries are banning so-called “conversion therapy.”
“These achievements are possible because of incredibly courageous human rights defenders and government partners on the ground, but I believe Americaās support is indispensable,” said Blinken. “When we engage ā sometimes publicly, sometimes privately, sometimes both ā when we share our own knowledge and experience, we can and we do achieve change.”
Blinken also announced the U.S. now considers sexual orientation and gender identity are part of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights that took effect in 1976.
“This is one of the key treaties committing nations to upholding universal rights,” he said.
“In our regular reporting to the council on human rights, we will continue to include incidents of discrimination or abuse committed against LGBTQI+ persons, now with the clear framework of this well-supported interpretation,” added Blinken.Ā “That will further empower our efforts.”
Blinken reiterated this point and the Biden-Harris administration’s commitment to the promotion of LGBTQ and intersex rights abroad when he spoke at the State Department’s Pride Month event.
“Defending, promoting LGBTQI+ rights globally is the right thing to do, but beyond that, itās the smart and necessary thing to do for our country, for our national security, for our well-being,” he said.
The White House
Jill and Ashley Biden headline White House Pride celebration
First lady celebrated historic pardons of LGBTQ veterans
First lady Jill Biden and the president and first lady’s daughter, Ashley Biden, headlined the White House Pride celebration on the South Lawn on Wednesday, followed by a performance by singer and actress Deborah Cox.
“My dad has built the most pro-equality administration” in history, Ashley Biden said, crediting the work of LGBTQ people of color like Marsha P. Johnson, a prominent figure in the Stonewall uprising of 1969, as well as “so many of you [who] have continued to lead their fearless fighting against against injustice here and around the world.”
She introduced her mother as “the woman who taught me to be myself up showed me in so many ways how I can make a difference” and who “works every single day, tirelessly, to ensure that all people have the opportunities and freedoms that they deserve.”
“I hope that all of you feel that freedom and love on the South Lawn today,” Jill Biden said.
Her remarks were briefly interrupted by a protestor’s chants of “no Pride in genocide,” which was drowned out by chants of “four more years.”
The first lady noted how many of the attendees came “here from states that are passing laws targeting LGBTQ Americans.”
“There are those who see our communities and our families and wish to tear them down,” she said, “those who can’t see that the world is so much bigger and [more] beautiful than they know ā but when our homes are threatened, when they strip away our rights, and deny our basic humanity, we say, ‘not on our watch.'”
“Pride is a celebration, but it is also a declaration,” the first lady said, highlighting the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges nine years ago, which established marriage equality as the law of the land.
She then credited the accomplishments of the Biden-Harris administration on matters of LGBTQ rights, including the repeal of the previous administration’s ban on military service by transgender servicemembers and the FDA’s loosening of restrictions on blood donation by gay and bisexual men.
The first lady also celebrated the president’s announcement earlier on Wednesday that he will pardon LGBTQ veterans who were discharged and court martialed because of their sexual orientation or gender identity.
“We will never stop fighting for this community,” she said.
HRC slams White House over position opposing gender affirming surgeries for minors
Parades, community events held to mark Pride Month in Va.
Concern over marriage equality in US grows two decades after first Mass. same-sex weddings
Out in the World: LGBTQ news from Europe and Asia
Toronto Pride parade cancelled after pro-Palestinian protesters disrupt it
Toronto Pride parade cancelled after pro-Palestinian protesters disrupt it
Stephen Mark Lukas makes sublime turn in āFunny Girlā
Despite record crowds, Baltimore Prideās LGBTQ critics say organizers dropped the ball
Haters troll official Olympics Instagram for celebrating gay athlete and boyfriend
Members of Congress introduce resolution to condemn Uganda’s Anti-Homosexuality Act
-
Canada1 day agoToronto Pride parade cancelled after pro-Palestinian protesters disrupt it
-
Theater5 days agoStephen Mark Lukas makes sublime turn in āFunny Girlā
-
Baltimore4 days agoDespite record crowds, Baltimore Prideās LGBTQ critics say organizers dropped the ball
-
Sports4 days agoHaters troll official Olympics Instagram for celebrating gay athlete and boyfriend