Massachusetts argues against legality of Federal gay marriage law, DOMA
”[DOMA] gives us funding but tells us to treat one category of married people differently than another. It forces us to violate equal protection.”
Massachusetts Assisant Attorney General Maura Healey arguing against the Defense of Marriage Act in the case of Massachusetts v. Health and Human Services. (Bay Windows / Keeen News )
”’Never before has the federal government told a married couple that they are married under state law but not under federal law,’ Healey said, adding that states ‘have always had exclusive control over defining and regulating marriage.’
”Healey cited the case of a military veteran who has asked that he and his same-sex spouse be buried in a veterans’ cemetery when they die, a privilege offered other married veterans. She said the state has decided to authorize the burial, even though it risks losing federal money for doing so.”
Excerpt from the AP’s report on a new lawsuit being argued by Maura Healey, the Assisant Attorney General for the state of Massachusetts. The state is arguing against the legality of the Defense of Marriage Act. The case is now before US District Court Judge Joseph L. Tauro. (AP)
Tauro drew laughter when he questioned whether the federal government had a legitimate interest in ”perpetuating heterosexuality in the graveyard,” and dismissed Hall’s argument that the federal law simply maintained the status quo by defining marriage as exclusively a heterosexual institution. In fact, the Defense of Marriage Act disrupted the status quo because marriage had been a matter left to the states ”since the beginning of time,” said Tauro, agreeing with an argument of Healey’s.
From the Boston Globe’s coverage of the state of Massachusetts taking on the US Federal Government for passing the discriminatory Defense of Marriage Act in the 1990s. Massachusetts Assistant AG Maura Healey is arguing that the Federal law discrminiates against the state’s rights to define and control marriage. Christopher Hall of the US Justice Department is arguing that DOMA is a Constitutionally valid law passed by Congress. The case is being heard by Judge Joseph Tauro. (Boston.com)
The law was put into place as a fearful, reactionary measure. President Bill Clinton said last August that the reason he signed DOMA into the law during his presidency because the alternative would have been to allow conservatives and Republicans to change the Constitution to define marriage as being between one man and one woman.
Support Metro Weekly’s Journalism
These are challenging times for news organizations. And yet it’s crucial we stay active and provide vital resources and information to both our local readers and the world. So won’t you please take a moment and consider supporting Metro Weekly with a membership? For as little as $5 a month, you can help ensure Metro Weekly magazine and MetroWeekly.com remain free, viable resources as we provide the best, most diverse, culturally-resonant LGBTQ coverage in both the D.C. region and around the world. Memberships come with exclusive perks and discounts, your own personal digital delivery of each week’s magazine (and an archive), access to our Member's Lounge when it launches this fall, and exclusive members-only items like Metro Weekly Membership Mugs and Tote Bags! Check out all our membership levels here and please join us today!
