Skip to comments.BREAKING: Second Circuit Court Finds Section 3 Of DOMA Unconstitutional
Posted on 10/18/2012 9:09:23 AM PDT by massmike
We have some breaking news out of New York: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has ruled on Windsor v. the United States, a case challenging Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act, and found a federal definition of marriage as one man and one woman violates the U.S. Constitution.
"[W]e conclude that Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act violates equal protection and is therefore unconstitutional," they wrote.
Our legal eagle Ari Ezra Waldman will have a full analysis soon.
(Excerpt) Read more at towleroad.com ...
For those two guys it's not in the far reaches of the distant past generations ago ~ or even all that many decades back!
It goes the other way too; something that is no longer constitutional may be held to be constitutional. (Look at prohibition and the War on Drugs, and how they now 'justify' "regulation" under the commerce clause now.)
I wonder if the IRS made everyone file individual and pay that rate regardless of married or not, we would not even have the gay marriage situation. I would be for filing single and have my wife do the save to save marriage. The problem is most people are selfish and would never go for it even though it would save marriage and take gay marriage off the table. People if given the choice would pick having gay marriage over filing “single” on their tax forms which is kinda sad.
Buddhism does not prohibit polygamy.
Everybody in MA is doomed to Outer Darkness anyway so what do any of us care about that crowd.
So now are they free to marry ten people? Or a pack of dogs? What are the parameters of 'equal protection' to those numbskulls?
Good point! And why don't we all pay the same percentage - now that is equal.
OMGoodness! The courts have been infiltrated by constitutional domestic terrorists! Someone tell Jan the Man, quick. It time to pull down the judges’ pants and to stick pervert agent hands in their wounds as they enter and exit the building!
I heard Little Richard say that talking about his own conversion from homosexuality probably 30 years ago.
> My state once reared folks such as Revere, Adams and Warren.
Now it rears folks such as Bawney Fwank and Gerry Studds. Maybe “reared” is not the best term to use here, but it fits.
Oh, and now you have the other Warren. Lizard-breath Faux-ca-haunt-us Warren.
I moved out of Mass in the 70s. Too bad a lot of Mass liberals had the same idea and brought their broken politics with them.
It’s a spreading disease, I tell ya.
HUH, how on this earth can they find marriage between one man and one woman unconstitional?
If ever we needed a constitutional amendment it was 10 years ago when all these mentally sick folks started to push their twisted agenda.
Also when is this crap ever going to stop, shall we also state that brother and sister, two men and a woman etc is also unconstitutional
Impeach the judges.
Romney and Ryan will say gay marriage is settled law and time to let it go and move on.
You know, my 5-year-old granddaughter can’t get a driver’s license. Something about age, driver’s ed training, and ability to operate the controls. Clearly this is a violation of the equal protection clause of the constitution. ACLU, I’ll be waiting for your phone call.
Notice that one and one is in there. If you can't limit it to one man and one woman, you can't limit it to one couple, either. And it would be speciest to say it is limited to human beings, so that is out.
You want to shake this debate up? Go down to City Hall right now and apply to marry your girlfriend, her girlfriend, and their two dogs.
If they give you any trouble, point to this ruling and DEMAND YOUR RIGHTS!!!
Guarantee that the judges have homosexual pals or family up there and that their emotions and how they felt with those who are family and friends came into this decision.
This court is now saying that anyone can marry who ever and as many.
Therefore polygamy and other kinds of marriage is now allowed.
To think all of this is based on how they like their sex, that is all it is.
Homosexuals are classed as people who like sex with the same sex, that is it, end of full stop, period .
Based on that then how one gets off sexually is now given special rights and to think even some on here and our side defends this sickness
Please post your clear and convincing evidence that Romney instituted gay marriage.
So why are age of consent laws constitutional? If we can’t discriminate by gender, why can we discriminate by age? We’ll have to abolish the drinking, driving and voting ages as well. We’ll also have to overturn all laws about women going topless, since it’s gender discrimination that men can walk around shirtless but women can’t. So that’s one good thing that could come of this.
got my wife out of that state about 9 years ago and she said it was the best move she ever did but what pisses her off is that those from up there bring their liberal ignorant socialist union ways and votes with them and then try to change states like VA, NC, FL.
I just hope every conservative up in the north east and west coast gets the hell out of their liberal utopia’s and moves to a swing or republican state, hopefully a swing state.
HATE CRIME LAWS ARE NOW UNCONSTITUTUIONAL.