U.S. Judge Rules Federal Gay Marriage Ban Unconstitutional
Have you heard the latest development in the fight to protect marriage? A U.S. District Judge in Boston ruled yesterday that part of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) is unconstitutional, a decision which could bring federal recognition to gay marriages from Massachusetts, among its many possible repercussions.
Here’s what Hadley Arkes, one of DOMA’s architects has to say: “Judge Joseph Tauro, in the federal district court in Boston, took it upon himself to strike down the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). With that stroke he would remove one of the key barriers standing in the way of imposing same-sex marriage on the nation as a whole. And it would be done through the power of judges alone, without the need to agitate the community in any political controversy, and without citizens or legislators needing to do such unseemly things as voting.”
And here’s a statement that the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) released:
NATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR MARRIAGE DECRIES
BOSTON FEDERAL JUDGE’S DECISION
STRIKING DOWN THE DEFENSE OF MARRIAGE ACT
“A Boston judge has no moral right to decide the marriage question for the people of the U.S.”
– Brian Brown, President, National Organization for Marriage
WASHINGTON, DC – The National Organization for Marriage (NOM) released the following statements today in response to a federal judge in Boston ruling the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) unconstitutional.
“Under the guidance of Elena Kagan’s brief that she filed when she was Solicitor General, Obama’s justice department deliberately sabotaged this case,” charged Brian Brown, President of NOM, referring to the Justice Department’s brief which described DOMA as discriminatory. Despite the explicit language in DOMA that the law was designed to protect children’s right to their mothers and fathers, the judge disavowed that DOMA has anything to do with responsible procreation. “With only Obama to defend DOMA, this federal judge has taken the extraordinary step of overturning a law passed by huge bipartisan majorities and signed into law by Pres. Clinton in 1996. A single federal judge in Boston has no moral right to decide the definition of marriage for the people of the United States,” Brown continued.
“Does this federal judge want to start another culture war?” asked Maggie Gallagher, Chairman of NOM. “Does he really want another Roe. v. Wade? The simple fact is that the right of the federal government to define marriage for the purposes of its federal law and federal territories has been clear since the late 19th century, when Congress banned polygamy. Only an incompetent defense could have lost this case. We expect to win in a higher court.”