Divorce Mediation Blog

The Defense of Marriage Act: Defending the Indefensible

Thursday, July 05, 2012

Since 2004, gays and lesbians have been legally free to marry in Massachusetts. That is now the law in six (6) states and the District of Columbia. Yet, by congressional action, signed into law by President Clinton, legally married couples here are not legally married for any federal purpose, nor is their status respected in most other states.

The Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) (declaring a marriage as only between one man and one woman for all federal law purposes and relieving other states of any obligation to recognize a same sex marriage permissibly created in another state) denies same sex spouses more than a thousand benefits, including the right to file joint tax returns, to have tax privileged spousal medical benefits and access to many social security and veterans survivors benefits. In divorce, gays and lesbians may not transfer property without taxation at the time of divorce, cannot claim alimony tax deductions and are prohibited from transferring pension assets without triggering tax consequences, which can be sometimes catastrophic; rights that all hetero-sexual married couples take for granted.

A group of plaintiffs sued in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts in the case of Gill v. O.P.M. and 2 companion cases, seeking to have DOMA declared unconstitutional. After defending DOMA and losing in the trial court, the Obama Administration declined to defend it again in the appeal of Judge Joseph Tauro’s judgment wherein he declared DOMA to be unconstitutional. The Department of Justice declared the statute indefensible. The United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, agreed with Judge Tauro and upheld his judgment.

The next stop for this controversy is the United States Supreme Court, where others will stand in as surrogates for the federal government in seeking to reverse the First Circuit’s decision, doing what the current government refuses to do: defend the indefensible.

Get e-mail notifications of new blog posts! Enter email address below.:

Delivered by FeedBurner

other articles

recent posts


litigation how baseball arbitration works mediators SJC divorced special master Massachusetts alimony pre-ARA alimony health insurance Levine Dispute Resolution Massachusetts alimony and child support traditional negotiations rehabilitative alimony Matrimonial Arbitration mediation Alimony Reform Act arbitrators divorce arbitration Baseball Arbitration medical benefits Same Sex Marriage self-adjusting alimony Obamacare Act Reforming Alimony in the Commonwealth Baseball IRC §2704 Self-adjusting alimony orders divorce mediator divorce lawyers LDRC health coverage disputes Chouteau Levine family support alimony statute conciliation divorce mediations fraud divorce process alimony Major League Baseball Arbitration Family Law Arbitration high-risk methodology Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly med-arb alimony law mediations Child Support Guidelines arbitration Boston med/arb lawyer-attended mediation family law arbitrators divorce and family law mediators alimony orders General term alimony Twinkies support orders divorce agreement divorce and family law family law Levine Dispute Resolution Center LLC lawyers private dispute resolution Levine Dispute Resolution Center The Seven Sins of Alimony Massachusetts lawyers Massachusetts alimony reform legislation family law mediation Divorce Agreements divorce litigation divorce arbitrator divorce mediation resolve disputes family law arbitrator facilitated negotiations Divorce separation family and probate law disputes divorce mediators annulment DOMA MLB labor agreement arbitrator Massachusetts divorce mediators family mediation divorce judgment COLA Uniform Arbitration Act Defense of Marriage Act lawyer Levine Dispute Resolutions mediator divorce arbitrators Cohabitation Baseball Players dispute resolution child support Massachusetts Alimony Reform Act