Skip to comments.Another Federal Judge Rules Defense of Marriage Act Unconstitutional
Posted on 05/25/2012 10:33:26 AM PDT by kevcol
(Bay City News) A federal judge ruled in Oakland that the state's public-employee pension system must make long-term care insurance equally available to same-sex spouses and partners.
U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken said a provision of the federal Defense of Marriage Act, or DOMA, is unconstitutional to the extent that it limits same-sex spouses of state workers in obtaining the insurance.
Wilken said the DOMA ban violated the U.S. Constitution's guarantee of equal treatment. She wrote that there was no proof the DOMA provision was "rationally related to a legitimate government interest."
In today's ruling, Wilken also struck down a U.S. Internal Revenue Service law to the extent that it bars domestic partners from enrolling in the long-term care insurance plan offered by CalPERS.
(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.kqed.org ...
J.D. from the UC Berkeley School of Law [check]
'National Lawyers Guild' member - a leftist "shadow" ABA [check]
Legal aid and public defender in SF [check]
Looks like a Dyke. [check]
Unconstitutional our ashes you leftist tyrant hack judge.
Actually, the PROBLEM started with the pandering to select Classes of people, by politicians, for their VOTES.
Consequently, the POLITICALLY-APPOINTED Judges ruled that the Constitution's "Equal Protection" clause did not mean TO ALL PEOPLE, but rather now means to all people's agenda's. MEN and WOMEN, regardless of religion, color, or National Origin, are ALL that should be applied as the Equal....what sex lives, net worth, or non-citizenships are issues that should not even enter into any consideration.
We've lost our Common Sense, and moral compass. Sex activity has NO BEARING on what should or should not be applied under the 14th Amendment, period.
Allowing foreigners (criminally in THIS country), voting rights, driver's licenses, social security benefits, income tax credits, etc., etc., is costing Trillions.
Implement "love it or leave it", and let the mal-contents try to find a Country that's more accomodating to their antics (good luck with that !)
Ya think just maybe they did a little shopping around for a worthy leftist gremlin federal judge to declare a valid law (DOMA) as unconstitutional?
An Amendment, mind you. The President has nothing to do with the amendment process.
If there are majorities in the House and Senate, they can propose the amendment, and then the states get it. The President need not be consulted.
Actually that would have worked perfectly had we, under Bush, slam-dunked DOMA as a Constitutional Amendment, with that bit of 2nd-tier accomodation as the sop to the mushy middle. NONE of this would be happening. Incrementalism favors the Left at every turn.
Wonder why gays can not conceive? Perhaps our generous government should make it a right?
Well, maybe in the interest of a real kinky state.
A lizzbo if I have ever seen one.
She looks butch-dykey. Is she?
DOMA does NOT violate any “equal protection”! EVERY adult in America has the right to marry ANY consenting partner of the opposite sex! The SAME rules apply to all. She never programmed a computer, I can tell!
“This is going to keep happening till a defense of marriage amendment to the Constitution is passed.”
The time for that has come.... and passed.
It’s too late now.
A few years ago, there was a “window of opportunity” through which a “Marriage Amendment” might have passed. But that window has now closed.
The left is traveling the same path with homosexual marriage as they did with abortion. That is, get liberalized laws passed in a few states, get court decisions in their favor in a few states, and then “go for the big one” in the Supreme Court.
Eventually, this is how they will win the issue.
Republicans and conservatives had their chance to stop gay marriage in it’s tracks, and backed away. They had a very good chance of getting a Marriage Amendment through both houses of Congress, but chose to put up the “Defense of Marriage” act because a Constitutional Amendment would have seemed too drastic, too “divisive”. They set themselves up for the defeat that’s coming.
By the way, I was one of the first posters on this board, and the first people anywhere, to propose a “Marriage Amendment” years ago. But again, one must “strike while the iron is hot”.
For conservatives, this iron has grown cold. I wish I could be more optimistic about this, but I’m not.
From a constitutional standpoint, DOMA is unconstitutional because the federal government does not have the power to legislate on such a matter.
But of course, those elected in both parties feel the need for government to have its say in everything.
I fully agree. The Tenth was written for a good reason.
Without reading the article, I hope that the House’s legal defense team will be appealing this ludicrous decision.
Insanely, this same "judge" will just find such an amendment to the US Constitution "unconstitutional."
And instead, we'd have homosexual imposition by another name, then.
Wrong solution, buddy.