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


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