Lawyer types: Could 'don't ask, don't tell"...

[KateAggie]

push us to a decision on gay marriage?

If a gay couple has one person serving, and they married in a state that recognizes their marriage? They'd have to get the same benefits as any other military couple, right? What happens, then, if they are stationed in North Carolina?

[Deleted]

I've always argued that I thought it would actually.

However, because gay marriage isn't recognized on a federal level, the military does not provide benefits to gay spouses regardless of where they are married or where they are stationed.

[Deleted]

Where is SBP our chief justices of the GBCN SCOTUS?

I think this issue is being litigated. I know the justice is not longer defending DOMA.

[y4m]

Taxes are another big issue that I'm sure there's some litigation in the lower courts on. If you're a legally married gay couple, you still file some kind of weird single variant on your federal taxes because of DOMA.

[Deleted]

May 14, 2012 11:24:52 GMT -5 @habbsies said:

However, because gay marriage isn't recognized on a federal level, the military does not provide benefits to gay spouses regardless of where they are married or where they are stationed.

Exactly.

The repeal of DADT just means that a service member cannot be discharged for being out. It doesn't do anything about benefits. DOMA prohibits the federal government from recognizing gay marriages.

This is why I get really annoyed when people say the federal government should "get out of the marriage business." Unless we're going to do away with spousal benefits for the military and other federal employees, and as long as we're going to have Social Security survivor benefits, and as long as we have tax codes that differentiate between single and married filers, the federal government will be in the "marriage business."

[Deleted]

But doesn't the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) signed by Bill Clinton over ride the full faith and credit clause on the issue of marriage? (i'm not sure it is constitutional and I think that's why Obama Justice has stopped defending it)

[y4m]

May 14, 2012 11:39:31 GMT -5 @septimus said:

But doesn't the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) signed by Bill Clinton over ride the full faith and credit clause on the issue of marriage? (i'm not sure it is constitutional and I think that's why Obama Justice has stopped defending it)

This is my understanding as well.

[basilosaurus]

I hope it pushes an overturn of DOMA. Until the fed gov't recognizes gay marriage, gay couples in the military are still screwed. I think they could provide good cases to challenge it's constitutionality.

It sort of still has something to do with states, though, since they're the ones granting the marriage that the fed has to recognize.

It really doesn't make sense to me that my marriage, done at a courthouse with no witnesses, no judge, for the low low price of $10 (yay Colorado!) allowed me to register for base privileges, health care, etc, the following Monday, when gay couples legally married in their own states, for which they had to go through many more hoops, don't get to do that.

[basilosaurus]

May 14, 2012 11:37:30 GMT -5 asdfjkl said:

I thought DADT we repealed, so that's not really going to be what pushes the issue. Military or not, the problem is going to be the full faith and credit clause of the Constitution, which says that states have to recognize the contracts, relationships, application of laws of other states. So if you got married in MA, and then moved to NC, regardless of whether you were in the military, NC is supposed to recognize your marriage. However, there are exceptions to this where the laws of one state are found to be morally repugnant (or some such language). So, for example, if one state allowed 12 year olds to get married, other states would NOT have to recognize that. The question is whether gay marriage is morally repugnant (or whatever that standard is - I can't remember the exact langauge and I'm getting ready for lunch so I'm not going to look it up).

WRT the bold, I remember a Secret Lives of Women, or somesuch, about a young couple that got married across state lines b/c of their ages. The husband still went to jail for statutory rape b/c the state they were living in did not recognize that marriage due to her young age.

I still think DADT could push the issue just b/c of the benefits denied. Marriage is also a federal issue. Is there anything like a class action civil rights case? A gay military couple would add another dimension in addition to a couple moving to another state.

[Deleted]

May 14, 2012 11:39:59 GMT -5 y4m said:

May 14, 2012 11:39:31 GMT -5 @septimus said:

But doesn't the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) signed by Bill Clinton over ride the full faith and credit clause on the issue of marriage? (i'm not sure it is constitutional and I think that's why Obama Justice has stopped defending it)

This is my understanding as well.

Yup. I've never really understood how DOMA wasn't a blatant violation of the Full Faith and Credit Clause.

[wawa]

May 14, 2012 11:56:18 GMT -5 @angryharpy said:

May 14, 2012 11:39:59 GMT -5 y4m said:

This is my understanding as well.

Yup. I've never really understood how DOMA wasn't a blatant violation of the Full Faith and Credit Clause.

So...it is, right? Can I get a primer from somebody on how it's been going in the courts since it was signed? I assume there have been cases working their way up.

And what happens now that the DOJ isn't defending it? Is somebody else doing it? How does that work?

[Deleted]

May 14, 2012 12:02:22 GMT -5 wawa said:

May 14, 2012 11:56:18 GMT -5 @angryharpy said:

Yup. I've never really understood how DOMA wasn't a blatant violation of the Full Faith and Credit Clause.

So...it is, right? Can I get a primer from somebody on how it's been going in the courts since it was signed? I assume there have been cases working their way up.

And what happens now that the DOJ isn't defending it? Is somebody else doing it? How does that work?

There was a decision in Fed. Dist. of Mass. where the district court judge said that DOMA did violate the constitution. Justice did not appeal that decision. (or something like that... I'm probably just talking out my ass)

[MrsAxilla]

May 14, 2012 12:02:22 GMT -5 wawa said:

May 14, 2012 11:56:18 GMT -5 @angryharpy said:

Yup. I've never really understood how DOMA wasn't a blatant violation of the Full Faith and Credit Clause.

So...it is, right? Can I get a primer from somebody on how it's been going in the courts since it was signed? I assume there have been cases working their way up.

And what happens now that the DOJ isn't defending it? Is somebody else doing it? How does that work?

It looks like there's six cases in various stages. The Obama administration has said it won't defend them, so it's Congress' option now.

[meshaliuknits]

May 14, 2012 12:36:15 GMT -5 MrsAxilla said:

It looks like there's six cases in various stages. The Obama administration has said it won't defend them, so it's Congress' option now.

And if Congress does what it usually does (nothing) what happens? Does the plaintiff win by forfeit?

[Deleted]

May 14, 2012 12:44:48 GMT -5 meshaliuknits said:

May 14, 2012 12:36:15 GMT -5 MrsAxilla said:

It looks like there's six cases in various stages. The Obama administration has said it won't defend them, so it's Congress' option now.

And if Congress does what it usually does (nothing) what happens? Does the plaintiff win by forfeit?

again I could be talking out my arse... but I think the House hired its own attorneys to defend DOMA

[basilosaurus]

May 14, 2012 12:30:28 GMT -5 asdfjkl said:

May 14, 2012 11:39:31 GMT -5 @septimus said:

But doesn't the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) signed by Bill Clinton over ride the full faith and credit clause on the issue of marriage? (i'm not sure it is constitutional and I think that's why Obama Justice has stopped defending it)

You can't "legislate" around the the Constitution. But I have always been very confused about the way the DOMA interacts with FF&C because marriage is not a federal issue. It exists state by state. The laws are different from state to state, the cost of getting a license, even the laws to qualify for the license (i.e. consanguinity laws are different from state to state)... So our federal government for tax purposes anyway just says you're married as long as the state you got married in recognizes your marriage and all the other states are supposed to recognize your marriage because of FF&C.

But our government doesn't allow gay couples to file taxes jointly, nor do they provide benefits to same sex spouses of federal employees, so some sort of legal wrangling is going on there.

[meshaliuknits]

May 14, 2012 13:00:19 GMT -5 @septimus said:

May 14, 2012 12:44:48 GMT -5 meshaliuknits said:

And if Congress does what it usually does (nothing) what happens? Does the plaintiff win by forfeit?

again I could be talking out my arse... but I think the House hired its own attorneys to defend DOMA

The All Mighty Google says you are correct abcnews.go.com/Politics/john-boehner-house-republicans-reinvigorate-legal-defense-marriage/story?id=13402466, they hired a lawyer last April.

I guess I'm mostly wondering what would happen if no one showed for the defense. We can't declare something unconstitutional via forfeit, I'm guessing.

[Deleted]

May 14, 2012 13:30:21 GMT -5 meshaliuknits said:

May 14, 2012 13:00:19 GMT -5 @septimus said:

again I could be talking out my arse... but I think the House hired its own attorneys to defend DOMA

The All Mighty Google says you are correct abcnews.go.com/Politics/john-boehner-house-republicans-reinvigorate-legal-defense-marriage/story?id=13402466, they hired a lawyer last April.

I guess I'm mostly wondering what would happen if no one showed for the defense. We can't declare something unconstitutional via forfeit, I'm guessing.

My head is a sponge of "useless information"....too bad I'm having a hard time remembering what I need to do at work :-)

[meshaliuknits]

That would make you an ideal Jeopardy! contestant, wouldn't it?

[Deleted]

May 14, 2012 13:34:42 GMT -5 meshaliuknits said:

That would make you an ideal Jeopardy! contestant, wouldn't it?

Nerd Alert--- I was on quiz team in high school