Supreme Court DOMA: The Anachronistic Law Must Be Struck Down

The U.S. Supreme Court is set to rule later this month on the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). The act, signed into law by former President Bill Clinton in 1996, defines marriage to mean "only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife," thus depriving same sex couples who marry in states where it is legal of federal recognition of their marriage. Furthermore, according to Freedom to Marry, this means that same-sex couples are not eligible for "over 1,138...protections and responsibilities afforded to different-sex couples."

The western facade of the Supreme Court building in Washington D.C. proudly proclaims "equal justice under law." But DOMA does not represent equal justice under law. Instead it is a massive, anachronistic misnomer that does not defend marriage itself but rather a narrowly defined and discriminatory concept of marriage that denies equal rights to millions of Americans.

If DOMA were really about defending marriage as an institution, then surely it would be designed to target things such as divorce, adultery, or abusive relationships. But obviously it is not. Instead it simply discriminates against people on the basis of the sex of the person who they marry. As the Washington Post's Joe Davidson notes, the "law is short on words but long on the hurt it has caused." Not even the government is willing to defend the discriminatory law in court, with a "majority-Republican House committee called the Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group (BLAG)" instead stepping up to do so.

According to Freedom to Marry, to date "DOMA has been ruled unconstitutional 10 times in seven different cases." In the case before the Supreme Court, Windsor v. United States, a widow from a same-sex marriage, Edie Windsor, was forced to pay $363,000 in federal taxes on her spouse's inheritance which she would not have had to pay if same sex-marriage had equal federal status. In hearing the case, both the U.S. District Court and the United States Court of Appeals have already ruled that section 3 of DOMA, which defines marriage as between a man and a woman, is unconstitutional. The Supreme Court now has to decide how to rule.

If the Supreme Court decides to uphold DOMA or simply throw out the challenge to its constitutionality, it will obviously not be the end the fight for marriage equality. But even if the the court strikes down DOMA as unconstitutional, the fight for marriage equality will not be over either, both in terms of how individual states would react to the decision and in terms of the need to continue to push for wider acceptance of same-sex marriage and gay rights in general. 

As Davidson's comment makes clear, this is about much more than just money. It is about taking an important step towards affording same-sex couples the same recognition and same rights as different sex couples. It is about doing what is right. DOMA does not defend marriage, instead it defends discrimination and has no place in a society that professes to uphold "equal justice under law."

How likely are you to make Mic your go-to news source?

Aubrey Bloomfield

Politics intern at PolicyMic. Recent graduate with an Honours (First Class) degree in International Relations. Moved to New York last year. Loves politics, international relations, music (especially Neil Young), food (especially dumplings), and space.

MORE FROM

Johnny Depp jokes about assassinating Donald Trump

"It's been a while," Depp said, "and maybe it's time."

Trump says he finds special counsel Mueller's relationship with James Comey "bothersome"

Trump says "virtually everybody agrees" that there's been no collusion or obstruction of justice.

'Hot Mic' podcast: GOP Senate health care, Comey tapes, 2016 election data stolen

The important stories to get you caught up for Friday

Watchdog groups sue Trump for deleting tweets, allegedly violating Presidential Records Act

Trump's deleted tweets may come back to haunt him.

Grizzly bear protections in Yellowstone National park are ending

A final ruling by US government officials will strike the Yellowstone grizzly bear from the list of threatened species after its population increased to 700.

Another day, another off-camera White House press briefing

The move to scale back on-camera press briefings comes amid Trump's increasing unwillingness to interact with the press.

Johnny Depp jokes about assassinating Donald Trump

"It's been a while," Depp said, "and maybe it's time."

Trump says he finds special counsel Mueller's relationship with James Comey "bothersome"

Trump says "virtually everybody agrees" that there's been no collusion or obstruction of justice.

'Hot Mic' podcast: GOP Senate health care, Comey tapes, 2016 election data stolen

The important stories to get you caught up for Friday

Watchdog groups sue Trump for deleting tweets, allegedly violating Presidential Records Act

Trump's deleted tweets may come back to haunt him.

Grizzly bear protections in Yellowstone National park are ending

A final ruling by US government officials will strike the Yellowstone grizzly bear from the list of threatened species after its population increased to 700.

Another day, another off-camera White House press briefing

The move to scale back on-camera press briefings comes amid Trump's increasing unwillingness to interact with the press.