SCOTUS Strikes Down DOMA

Your News Companion by Ben Mathis-Lilley
June 26 2013 11:04 AM

SCOTUS Hands Two Landmark Victories to Gay Marriage Push

Gay rights supporter Vin Testa waves a rainbow flag outside the U.S. Supreme Court building on June 26, 2013 in Washington, D.C.

Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images

The Supreme Court on Wednesday handed down its long-awaited rulings on both the federal Defense of Marriage Act and California's Proposition 8. In short, the justices struck down a key provision in the federal law as unconstitutional and dismissed the state case, clearing the way for gay marriage to again be legal in California. It wasn't a clean sweep for gay rights advocates and their allies, but it was nonetheless a historic day.

Josh Voorhees Josh Voorhees

Josh Voorhees is a Slate senior writer. He lives in Iowa City. 

The Slatest and Slate proper will have much, much more on both of these cases as the day goes on. But for now, a quick cheat sheet.


DOMA: Justice Kennedy joined the court's liberal wing—made up of Justices Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan—to strike down DOMA as unconstitutional as a matter of equal protection. The big takeaway: The ruling means that legally married same-sex couples will be eligible for the same federal benefits as heterosexual couples. Here's the SCOTUSBlog with the details [emphasis added]:

"The Court explained that the states have long had the responsibility of regulating and defining marriage, and some states have opted to allow same-sex couples to marry to give them the protection and dignity associated with marriage. By denying recognition to same-sex couples who are legally married, federal law discriminates against them to express disapproval of state-sanctioned same-sex marriage. This decision means that same-sex couples who are legally married must now be treated the same under federal law as married opposite-sex couples."

For those who want to read it with their own eyes, here's the decision: Windsor v. United States.

Prop 8: The high court ruled that the plaintiffs didn't have the legal standing they needed to challenge the lower court's ruling that struck down the law banning gay marriage. While the decision itself was a technical one that didn't address gay marriage directly, it nonetheless has major implications for gays and lesbians. As we explained back in March, by punting on the Prop 8 case the justices will clear the way for gay marriage to again be legal in the Golden State.

The narrow majority did not consist of usual allies: Chief Justice Roberts wrote the opinion, and was joined by Ginsburg, Breyer, Kagan and Scalia. SCOTUSBlog, again, with the details:

"After the two same-sex couples filed their challenge to Proposition 8 in federal court in California, the California government officials who would normally have defended the law in court, declined to do so. So the proponents of Proposition 8 stepped in to defend the law, and the California Supreme Court (in response to a request by the lower court) ruled that they could do so under state law. But today the Supreme Court held that the proponents do not have the legal right to defend the law in court. As a result, it held, the decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, the intermediate appellate court, has no legal force, and it sent the case back to that court with instructions for it to dismiss the [appeal]."

For those who want to read it with their own eyes, here's the decision: Hollingsworth v. Perry.

More to come from both The Slatest and Slate proper. For now:

***Slate is collecting your photo and video reactions to the ruling. Send them to us on Twitter, Instagram and Vine using the hashtag #SCOTUSreax***

Read more from Slate’s coverage of the gay marriage cases at the Supreme Court, and follow @JoshVoorhees and the rest of the @slatest team on Twitter.



Don’t Worry, Obama Isn’t Sending U.S. Troops to Fight ISIS

But the next president might. 

The Extraordinary Amicus Brief That Attempts to Explain the Wu-Tang Clan to the Supreme Court Justices

Amazon Is Officially a Gadget Company. Here Are Its Six New Devices.

The Human Need to Find Connections in Everything

It’s the source of creativity and delusions. It can harm us more than it helps us.

How Much Should You Loathe NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell?

Here are the facts.

Altered State

The Plight of the Pre-Legalization Marijuana Offender

What should happen to weed users and dealers busted before the stuff was legal?

Surprise! The Women Hired to Fix the NFL Think the NFL Is Just Great.

You Shouldn’t Spank Anyone but Your Consensual Sex Partner

Sept. 17 2014 5:10 PM The Most Awkward Scenario in Which a Man Can Hold a Door for a Woman
  News & Politics
Altered State
Sept. 17 2014 11:51 PM The Plight of the Pre-Legalization Marijuana Offender What should happen to weed users and dealers busted before the stuff was legal?
Business Insider
Sept. 17 2014 1:36 PM Nate Silver Versus Princeton Professor: Who Has the Right Models?
Sept. 17 2014 6:53 PM LGBTQ Luminaries Honored With MacArthur “Genius” Fellowships
  Double X
The XX Factor
Sept. 17 2014 6:14 PM Today in Gender Gaps: Biking
  Slate Plus
Slate Fare
Sept. 17 2014 9:37 AM Is Slate Too Liberal?  A members-only open thread.
Brow Beat
Sept. 17 2014 8:25 PM A New Song and Music Video From Angel Olsen, Indie’s Next Big Thing
Future Tense
Sept. 17 2014 9:00 PM Amazon Is Now a Gadget Company
  Health & Science
Medical Examiner
Sept. 17 2014 11:48 PM Spanking Is Great for Sex Which is why it’s grotesque for parenting.
Sports Nut
Sept. 17 2014 3:51 PM NFL Jerk Watch: Roger Goodell How much should you loathe the pro football commissioner?