ClydeR
07-08-2009, 05:10 PM
There is a lot of crazy stuff going on in the courts. That's why I am so concerned about Obama's nomination Judge Sotomayor to be on the Supreme Court. Just look at this case brought by the State of Massachusetts. They are trying to get the courts to overturn the part of the Defense of Marriage Act that says the federal government will recognize only those marriages between one man and one woman.
I don't even understand the portion of the argument (bolded in the quote below) that Massachusetts is making about not being allowed to treat its citizens equally. Just because homosexuals "married" in Massachusetts don't have their "marriages" recognized federally, that doesn't mean Massachusetts has to treat them differently.
President Obama pledged during the campaign to push for overturning the Defense of Marriage Act, but has focused on the economy, healthcare, other issues since taking office.
But more pressure could come from Massachusetts, which today became the first state to sue over the 1996 law, which defines marriage as between one man and one woman and which allows states to ignore gay marriages performed in other states.
That unfairly excludes more than 16,000 Massachusetts same-sex couples, who have married since the Bay State in 2004 became the first to legalize gay marriage, from "critically important rights and protections based on marital status," Attorney General Martha Coakley said.
The lawsuit (read it here (http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/DOMA%20Complaint%20FINAL.pdf)) asserts that DOMA is unconstitutional because it interferes with the commonwealth’s "sovereign authority to define and regulate the marital status of its residents" and also alleges that DOMA exceeds Congress’s authority because Congress does not have a valid reason for requiring Massachusetts to treat married same-sex couples differently from all other married couples.
More... (http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2009/07/mass_sues_over.html)
The suit does not challenge the portion of the Defense of Marriage Act that says one state is not required to recognize homosexual "marriages" performed in another state.
I don't even understand the portion of the argument (bolded in the quote below) that Massachusetts is making about not being allowed to treat its citizens equally. Just because homosexuals "married" in Massachusetts don't have their "marriages" recognized federally, that doesn't mean Massachusetts has to treat them differently.
President Obama pledged during the campaign to push for overturning the Defense of Marriage Act, but has focused on the economy, healthcare, other issues since taking office.
But more pressure could come from Massachusetts, which today became the first state to sue over the 1996 law, which defines marriage as between one man and one woman and which allows states to ignore gay marriages performed in other states.
That unfairly excludes more than 16,000 Massachusetts same-sex couples, who have married since the Bay State in 2004 became the first to legalize gay marriage, from "critically important rights and protections based on marital status," Attorney General Martha Coakley said.
The lawsuit (read it here (http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/DOMA%20Complaint%20FINAL.pdf)) asserts that DOMA is unconstitutional because it interferes with the commonwealth’s "sovereign authority to define and regulate the marital status of its residents" and also alleges that DOMA exceeds Congress’s authority because Congress does not have a valid reason for requiring Massachusetts to treat married same-sex couples differently from all other married couples.
More... (http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2009/07/mass_sues_over.html)
The suit does not challenge the portion of the Defense of Marriage Act that says one state is not required to recognize homosexual "marriages" performed in another state.