[TheRealVille]

A federal judge in San Francisco on Wednesday threw out a key provision of the Defense of Marriage Act, becoming the latest court to rule that the law passed by Congress to prohibit federal recognition of same-sex marriage violated the constitutional rights of same-sex couples.

Jeffrey S. White, a United States District Court judge appointed by President George W. Bush in 2002, ruled that the act violated the equal protection clause of the Constitution by denying Blue Cross health benefits to the spouse of Karen Golinski, who works as a staff lawyer in the United States Court of Appeals in the Ninth Circuit. She married her partner of 20 years, Amy Cunninghis, in August 2008 during the brief period when same-sex marriages were permitted in California.

The decision is the latest in a string of federal court rulings against the Defense of Marriage Act, which prohibits the federal government from recognizing same-sex marriages conducted in states where it is legal. More challenges are moving through other federal courts, and the Supreme Court seems likely to take up the question.

Judge White ruled that the act did not provide “a justification that is substantially related to an important governmental objective” which would be necessary for a law that is aimed at one specific group of people, in this case gay men and lesbians.

“The imposition of subjective moral beliefs of a majority upon a minority cannot provide a justification for the legislation,” he said in his 43-page ruling.

The act was passed by Congress and signed by President Bill Clinton in the midst of his re-election campaign in 1996. President Obama instructed his attorney general, Eric H. Holder Jr., not to defend the act, arguing that it was in fact unconstitutional. As a result, the case for the law was made on behalf of a lawyer hired by the House of Representatives.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/23/us/rul....html?_r=1

The government's denial of all federal benefits to same-sex married couples is an irrational and unconstitutional act of discrimination, a federal judge ruled Wednesday, a step toward a likely Supreme Court test of the law known as the Defense of Marriage Act.

DOMA is based on unfounded assumptions about marriage and the suitability of gays and lesbians as parents and was enacted in 1996 by a Congress avid to show its disapproval of homosexuality, said U.S. District Judge Jeffrey White of San Francisco.

He quoted numerous statements by backers of the act during congressional debate over it, including one by Sen. Jesse Helms, R-N.C., that "the moral and spiritual survival of this nation" were at stake. Another supporter, Rep. Bob Barr, R-Ga. - who has since turned against DOMA - said in 1996 that marriage was "under assault by homosexual extremists."

The law "treats gay men and lesbians differently on the basis of their sexual orientation" without any legal basis, said White, an appointee of former President George W. Bush. "The imposition of subjective moral beliefs of a majority on a minority cannot provide a justification."

His ruling is the second in the nation to declare the law unconstitutional, and the first since President Obama abandoned defense of DOMA a year ago. It adds momentum to an issue that could bring the question of same-sex marriage before the U.S. Supreme Court.



Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cg...z1nDHwN7Hf