I posted about the recent federal ruling (July 8th blog post below) concerning the unconstitutional standing of DOMA (The Defense of Marriage Act), and an individual on the UMaine Forum responded, questioning my judgment that this decision could result in nationwide marriage equality. He wrote,
Sunny, I’m happy about this ruling because not only does it grant benefits to legally married gay couples, but it also reasserts certain states rights to govern. Unfortunately, I don’t see anything in this ruling to lead me to think national policy will be to allow gay marriage.. If anything, it would seem to strengthen each state’s right to decide and keep the feds out of it. Keep working on it though, it will eventually happen here.
While his comment was friendly, it occurred to me that many people are not familiar with civil rights in American history, especially as they apply to marriage. This is perhaps only to the fault of our public education system, but civil rights is a complex issue to begin with. To know why overturning DOMA is so important to nationwide marriage equality, you have to know a little history and exactly what DOMA is and how it affects our laws. The best place to start is with the 1967 Loving case, which essentially “legalized” interracial marriage nationwide. It is important to understand why DOMA has prevented a “gay version” of the Loving case and therefore why yesterday’s federal ruling is so important to nationwide marriage equality. I made the following response on the UMaine forum:
No, I think it’s going to be more significant than that. That is only one element of it. The other point of the federal judge is that same-sex couples should not be denied the same Federal benefits. And finally, and most significantly, the removal of DOMA is an immediate shortcut to nationwide marriage equality because the DOMA is the ONLY thing preventing interstate lawsuits. This is how interracial marriage was essentially “legalized” nationwide with the Loving decision in 1967. Long story short, the Loving couple was married in DC, which recognized interracial marriage, but then Virginia didn’t recognize their marriage when they moved (Virginia didn’t recognize interracial marriage, and interracial sexual relations were also criminal acts in Virginia), and they sued Virginia and it went to the Supreme Court.
Some people, myself included, believe that the fundamentalists used DOMA as a preemptive move because they knew same-sex marriage would follow the same pattern as interracial marriage if they didn’t do anything to stop it. DOMA was passed in 1996, 7 years before the first state (MA) began recognizing same-sex marriage in late 2003. DOMA does little more than prevent a same-sex couple in a state such as Mass. from suing a state like Maine that doesn’t recognize same-sex marriage. As soon as DOMA is removed, the lawsuits can begin and now that the Supreme Court has recognized sexual orientation as an “identifiable class” (equal to race, ethnicity, gender, etc.) there is no reason to believe it would rule differently than it did in the Loving case. However, I think the Prop.8 lawsuit might reach the Supreme Court and the same ultimate decision first, but this Boston lawsuit is moving at lightspeed compared to most federal court cases, so who knows?
As the article pointed out, “The rulings apply to Massachusetts but could have broader implications if they’re upheld on appeal.”