The legal team which argued for, and won, same-sex marriage will file suit today in Boston seeking some federal benefits for same-sex marriage partners. If successful, the suit would challenge the Defense of Marriage Act, which prevents federal recognition of same-sex unions. The suit is narrow in focus, leaving the whole, “states need not recognize each others marriages” portion of the bill alone and instead, focuses on federal benefits for married couples such as “Social Security, federal income tax, federal employees and retirees, and the issuance of passports”, which have a strong shot of falling under the equal protection clause.
Bay Windows reports on the efforts of the Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders, who are bringing the suit on behalf of eight Massachusetts couples and three widowers:
“GLAD believes the suit may ultimately be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court, which would mark the first time the nation’s highest court heard a major DOMA challenge. GLAD filed the suit, called Gill, et al vs. Office of Personnel Management, et al, on behalf of eight couples and three widowers, all from Massachusetts. Among the plaintiffs is Dean Hara, widower of the late Congressman Gerry Studds.
Janson Wu, an attorney for GLAD working on the case, said the plaintiffs have been denied a range of important benefits under DOMA, and these benefits will be the focus of the suit. The Office of Personnel Management, which administers federal employee benefits, turned down Hara’s application to receive survivor benefits through Studds’ federal pension, including health insurance; Hara currently pays about $7000 per year out of pocket for health insurance that other surviving spouses of federal employees would receive at no cost. Hara was also denied the lump sum Social Security death benefits used by spouses to pay for funeral costs.
“You realize when you get married there are both benefits and responsibilities, and it hurts to realize that you’re not being treated fairly,” said Hara, who lives in Boston “… Our marriage is being treated differently, [and] I am being denied something that his colleagues and anyone who works for the federal government can leave on to the people that they love. I think that’s a basic human feeling, that in the passage of time, that their spouse will be alone, and they’re always concerned that that person will be taken care of, and that’s your basic family value.”
Sebbe
I hear a lot of people here in Boston say they are over the gay marriage fight, they already have it and are ready to move on to bigger things to fight. Well here you go.
Chitown Kev
I was reading in the NYT that Gerry Studds widower is involved in this suit.
I am just not sure that SCOTUS is ready for this just yet.
Sebbe
@Chitown Kev – I read that too in the NYTIMES and its quoted above as well from the Bay Windows. For a local. Bay Windows is actually decent.
thisismikesother
Reason number 734 why I love the place I live.
DonG90806
Based on their past legal opinions, I think the whole case will come down to how Justice Kennedy decides. Although he is a Catholic, he wrote a strong supportive opinion for gays in the case of Romer v. Evans. His opinion can be found at
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/94-1039.ZO.html
Although Justice Kennedy supports gay rights, this case involves the consequences of gay marriage and being a Catholic, it’s hard to know how he will decide. Without him, I think the court is divided 4-4.
Don
Jaroslaw
Actually, I’m quite surprised the “full faith & credit” clause aspect to DOMA hasn’t been challenged before now.
And unfortunately, this challenge, if heard by SCOTUS, won’t address it either, which is already mentioned I know. Baby steps before you can run I guess.