DOMA: US Supreme Court Declares Law Defending Traditional Marriage Unconstitutional

DOMA was the inconsiderate and rapacious reaction from Congress to a ruling from the Supreme Court of Hawaii which, in 1996, had declared the law that reserved marriage only to unions between a man and a woman unconstitutional. The dread, deliberately declared by Congress, was that after Hawaii, other states as well would have to recognize same-sex marriage. Thereafter, Congress took remedial action, asserting that individual states had the right not to recognize these types of marriages, and that federal law did not recognize same-sex unions in any case.

Today’s ruling challenges the latter aspect.

DOMA was unconstitutional ever since its approval because by targeting a specific class of citizens (gays and lesbians), it established a prejudicial treatment of these people, different from that applicable to heterosexual couples, and was thus a clear, evident and violent contradiction of the Equal Protection Clause.

Thus, ever since its beginnings, the defense of the traditional marriage took the shape of a message to the U.S.: The federal government does not recognize that gays and lesbians can form — with people of the same sex — strong and lasting unions, made of material and spiritual communion, like heterosexual unions. Now, this belief has finally been declared contrary to the Constitution.

As President Obama said this year, in January, during his inaugural address, “If we are truly created equal, then surely the love we commit to one another must be equal as well.” It couldn’t be more true.

Pending further comments and insights, which would be available only after proper observations, the two arguments used by the Supreme Court to declare the unconstitutionality of DOMA can now be identified:

1) DOMA is unconstitutional because, as family rights, marriage is a reserved domain of states. Therefore, by deciding which marriage to recognize and which one not to, the Congress has violated this principle by interfering with states’ choices.

2) DOMA is unconstitutional because it deprives an entire class of citizens of actual benefits (more than 1,000) conferred by federal law.

Concisely, according to the Supreme Court, “The history of DOMA’s enactment and its own text demonstrate that interference with the equal dignity of same-sex marriages, a dignity conferred by the States in the exercise of their sovereign power, was more than an incidental effect of the federal statute. It was its essence.”

If we then take a look at the case on which the court has ruled, one realizes how this landmark ruling represents nothing less than an application — to people’s actual lives — of legitimate demands of freedom, justice and equality. It was about a female couple who married in Canada and resided in New York. The state has granted same-sex marriages since 2011 and recognized out-of-state same-sex marriages since 2008. On the death of her wife, the spouse (her heir) was charged more than $300,000 in federal estate taxes, as if she was an unrelated person.

Why, the woman asked herself, would I pay these taxes if my marriage was heterosexual? The court answered that “the principal purpose and the necessary effect of this law are to demean those persons who are in a lawful marriage.” Hence, it was ruled unconstitutional.

Today, an end was put to an injustice, and to a law dictated by fear, ignorance and prejudice. From now on, America also expressly recognizes that gay love is full and genuine love as well.