The Supreme Court takes up DOMA

Edith Windsor

Edith Windsor (Richard Drew/Associated Press)

The long-awaited announcement has finally come. The Supreme Court of the United States will take up two cases involving same-sex marriage. Thus we could be in the final days of the discrimination wrought by the so-called Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).

The court will hear a challenge to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision that California’s Proposition 8 is unconstitutional. The 2008 ballot measure made same-sex marriage illegal there through an amendment to the Golden State’s constitution. The thousands of gay male and lesbian couples who were able to marry there remain in legal limbo.

The court will also hear Windsor v. United States.  Edith Windsor and Thea Spyer of New York had been together 42 years when they legally married in Canada in 2007.  When Spyer died in 2009, Windsor had to pay the Internal Revenue Service $363,053 in federal estate taxes because DOMA prevents the Internal Revenue Service from recognizing her as a surviving spouse.

As I optimistically pointed out in October, DOMA is doomed. The main reason for my optimism is based in the fact that the Windsor case is not a quest for a special right of any kind. Windsor was legally married. What she wants — what all similarly suited same-sex couples and those who aspire to marriage want for themselves — is to have her marriage recognized by the federal government and to enjoy the rights and responsibilities that go with that. But as The Post reports, the Windsor case “would not require an answer to the broader constitutional question of whether [same-sex couples] must be allowed to marry.”

On Election Day, the people of Maine, Maryland and Washington state said yes to marriage equality. The people of Minnesota beat back an effort to ban same-sex marriage through their state constitution. While the rights of a minority should never be up to a popular vote, that voters in those states said “I do” to allowing gay and lesbian couples marry is an historic shift that should not be ignored by the Supreme Court.

“With the clock now ticking on Supreme Court rulings on our freedom to marry and full federal respect for lawful marriages without a ‘gay exception,’ it’s now more urgent than ever that we redouble our work to maximize our chances of winning in the Court,” said Evan Wolfson, the founder of Freedom to Marry. “The key is to create a climate of encouragement for the Court by winning even more states and winning over even more hearts and minds.  We want the justices to see that ruling for the right side of history will not only stand the test of time but be true to where the American people are.”

Arguments will be heard in March. A decision is expected in June.

Also on PostPartisan

Where the press failed in 2012