Fourth DOMA Case Petitioned to Supreme Court
Pressure is mounting on the Supreme Court as another case challenging the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act was petitioned for review on Tuesday.
Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders asked the high court to review Pedersen v. Office of Personnel Management, a Connecticut case surrounding Joanne Pendersen and her wife, Ann Meitzen.
Pendersen, who served in a civilian position for the U.S. Department of the Navy for 30 years, sued the federal government in November 2010 after Meitzen was denied coverage on her federal health insurance plan because of DOMA.
Last month, an appointee of President George W. Bush, U.S. District Court Judge Vanessa Bryant, ruled that Section 3 of DOMA, which prohibits federal recognition of same-sex marriages, is unconstitutional on the grounds that it violates the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.
GLAD’s petition for writ of certiorari gives the Supreme Court an opportunity to immediately review the case and makes the case the fourth concerning DOMA’s constitutionality requested for review by the Supreme Court.
According to the petition, GLAD argues the case should be reviewed because it demonstrates DOMA’s negative impact on several federal programs, including the federal income tax, Social Security, and federal employee and retiree benefits.
Moreover, GLAD argues for immediate consideration because of the continuing economic burden placed on the couple and their children by the federal government’s refusal to grant Meitzen coverage under Pendersen’s health insurance plan.
In a statement, Mary Bonauto, a GLAD attorney representing Pedersen, said DOMA “heaps disrespect” on thousands of married same-sex couples across the country with each passing day.
“These plaintiffs need to hear definitively from the Supreme Court whether or not the federal government will ultimately respect their love, commitment and legal bonds,” Bonauto added.
Multiple lower courts have declared DOMA unconstitutional since the Obama administration stopped defending the law in February 2011. The Bipartisan Legal Advisory Groups (BLAG), which is controlled by House Republicans, has sought to defend the constitutionality of DOMA.
Opponents and supporters alike of the expansive federal law hope the Supreme Court will consider at least one case to determine the law’s constitutionality. If arguments are heard, a ruling is expected by June 2013.
[Photo: Ann Meitzen and Joanne Pendersen (Photo courtesy of GLAD.)]
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!
