Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Obama urges Supreme Court to strike down federal Defense of Marriage Act
FoxNews.com ^ | 2/23/2013

Posted on 02/23/2013 8:11:22 PM PST by RoosterRedux

The Obama administration is asking the Supreme Court to strike down the federal law defining marriage as a union between only a man and a woman.

The request regarding the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act was made Friday in a brief by Solicitor General Donald Verrilli that argues the law is unconstitutional because it violates "the fundamental guarantee of equal protection."

The high court is set to hear two cases next month on the issue: the constitutional challenge on Proposition 8, the 2008 California that allowed same-sex marriages in the state that two years later was overturned, and United States v. Windsor, which challenges DOMA.

Edith Windsor, a California resident, was married to her female partner in Canada in 2007 but was required to pay roughly $360,000 in federal estate taxes because the marriage is not recognized under DOMA.

(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...


TOPICS: Front Page News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: homosexualagenda
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-60 next last
As Kevin Dujan of Chicago (and Hillbuzz.org) says...Obama is not heterosexual, not bisexual...he is homosexual.

And Michelle is the beard selected by Jeremiah Wright (and what a beard it is!).

1 posted on 02/23/2013 8:11:29 PM PST by RoosterRedux
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: RoosterRedux
Obama is the perfect candidate of the left (however much he might be the son of a jackel)...he is half black, all muslim, all un-American, all Marxist, all anti-Christian, all anti-Jew, all anti-Israel, all anti-Europe...and anti-democracy.

He is the perfect traitor to all that we treasure and respect.

But he will not die easily...because he is Satan's favorite son.

2 posted on 02/23/2013 8:17:28 PM PST by RoosterRedux (Get armed, practice in the use of your weapons, get physically fit, stay alert!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RoosterRedux

Has he bought a bridal gown yet, or is it Reggie Love who’ll wear that?


3 posted on 02/23/2013 8:44:09 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet (I'll raise $2million for Sarah Palin's presidential run. What'll you do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RoosterRedux

We can only hope that if he keeps sticking his pole in fecal matter, it will take its toll.


4 posted on 02/23/2013 8:52:04 PM PST by soycd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: RoosterRedux

I wonder if Roberts and Kagan will recuse themselves?


5 posted on 02/23/2013 8:58:14 PM PST by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RoosterRedux
The Obama administration is asking the Supreme Court to strike down the federal law defining marriage as a union between only a man and a woman.

LMBO!!
The African communist scumbag thinks the Supreme Court can overrule Webster's Dictionary?

6 posted on 02/23/2013 9:03:46 PM PST by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RoosterRedux; All
All that DOMA did was to win votes for incumbent federal lawmakers from voters who don't know the Constitution, particularly the Founding States' division of federal and state government powers.

More specifically, noting that the states have never delegated to Congress via the Constitution the specific power to regulate marriage, the Founders made the 10th Amendment to clarify in general that such issues are automatically state power issues.

So I will reluctantly side with justices who decide that federal DOMA is unconstitutional. The joke is on patriots who don't bother to read the Constitution.

7 posted on 02/23/2013 9:10:33 PM PST by Amendment10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RoosterRedux

Are we all just allowed to ignore laws we don’t agree with...?


8 posted on 02/23/2013 9:12:49 PM PST by 2banana (My common ground with terrorists - they want to die for islam and we want to kill them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RoosterRedux

I’m sure all the black preachers will be advising their flocks to protest.


9 posted on 02/23/2013 9:17:14 PM PST by Terry Mross (How long before America is gone?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RoosterRedux

Evil is on the march.

Only God can save us now.


10 posted on 02/23/2013 9:32:56 PM PST by Rome2000 (THE WASHINGTONIANS AND UNIVERSAL SUFFRAGE ARE THE ENEMY -ROTATE THE CAPITAL AMONGST THE STATES)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lancey Howard

11 posted on 02/23/2013 9:35:11 PM PST by Rome2000 (THE WASHINGTONIANS AND UNIVERSAL SUFFRAGE ARE THE ENEMY -ROTATE THE CAPITAL AMONGST THE STATES)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Amendment10
I hope you also call for the abolishment of the Social Security Act and any Federal benefit that goes towards spouses of the deceased. Also Mr. Constitutional scholar, how would you go about revoking the income tax laws, federal mind you, that grant spousal "benefits"? Built in all those Federal laws are specific areas in which the Federal government defines what a spouse is, and it ain't Adam and Steve.

In theory you are correct, but the Federal government's expansion in the 20th century clearly convoluted your theory. Please read what constitutes a spouse, say wife, under the Social Security Act. This becomes self evident that a need to define a legal marriage is required if people understood reason instead of a Constitution which has been trampled upon way before DOMA.
12 posted on 02/23/2013 9:54:27 PM PST by rollo tomasi (Working hard to pay for deadbeats and corrupt politicians.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: RoosterRedux

>> Obama urges Supreme Court to strike down federal DOMA

I guess then homosexual marriage law can also be ruled unconstitutional.


13 posted on 02/23/2013 9:59:47 PM PST by Gene Eric (The Palin Doctrine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RoosterRedux

“Edith Windsor, a California resident, was married to her female partner in Canada in 2007 but was required to pay roughly $360,000 in federal estate taxes because the marriage is not recognized under DOMA.”

It’s not a tax. It’s a fee.


14 posted on 02/23/2013 10:00:16 PM PST by EQAndyBuzz (Got a problem? Nothing a drone strike can't fix.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rollo tomasi
"I hope you also call for the abolishment of the Social Security Act and any Federal benefit that goes towards spouses of the deceased. .."

Thank you for your concern about the spouses of the deceased. Please consider the following concerning such spouses.

Not only has each state always had the 10th Amendment protected power to run its own customized SS program to insure that the spouses of the deceased have an income, but there's never been anything to stop the states from exercising their unique, Ariticle V power to ratify proposed amendments to the Constitution to do to grant Congress the specific power to tax and spend for a national SS program.

In other words, just as it did with constitutonally indefensible federal Obamacare, Congress wrongy established SS without first petitioning the Article V state majority to ratify amendments to the Constitution which would have granted Congress the specific powers that it needed to establish such programs.

15 posted on 02/23/2013 10:19:39 PM PST by Amendment10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: rollo tomasi

If the primary argument here is “equal protection,” would that not also open a clear legal path for incestuous marriage and polygamy?


16 posted on 02/24/2013 12:39:20 AM PST by zeestephen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Amendment10

“The joke is on patriots who don’t bother to read the Constitution.”

No. The joke is on people who think they can interpret the Constitution with a straw man 2nd grade interpretation that is best utilized watching cartoons and InfoWars.


17 posted on 02/24/2013 3:01:26 AM PST by rbmillerjr (We have No Opposition to Obama's Socialist Agenda)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: RoosterRedux
Citizens of the United States URGE the Supreme Court to strike down Obama !
18 posted on 02/24/2013 3:14:18 AM PST by Yosemitest (It's Simple ! Fight, ... or Die !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EQAndyBuzz

What if Edith Windsor was arrested in California because she was driving 100 mph, which is legal on the German Autobahn, and it cost her money and liberty?

Which laws of Canada or Mexico should extend across borders?

What if Canada legalized polygamy? Would polygamous marrieds demand special treatment in the US tax code?

They picked a bad case. The facts and the law are not on their side. The Congress sets tax policy, not the SC. The liberals on the SC will ignore reality no matter what.

It will be very close.


19 posted on 02/24/2013 4:10:11 AM PST by 1010RD (First, Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: zeestephen

We are already there:

http://bangordailynews.com/2013/02/23/living/my-wife-is-my-sister/

It’s not clear if the above is true, but it certainly is possible.


20 posted on 02/24/2013 4:15:30 AM PST by 1010RD (First, Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: AdmSmith; AnonymousConservative; Berosus; bigheadfred; Bockscar; ColdOne; Convert from ECUSA; ...

Thanks RoosterRedux.


21 posted on 02/24/2013 4:35:49 AM PST by SunkenCiv (Romney would have been worse, if you're a dumb ass.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: rbmillerjr

When did Freepers become so insulting to one another? I remember when people on here had civilized discussions and even when they disagreed, they were respectful and polite. Has Obama turned us all into rude, short-tempered, obnoxious little jerks?


22 posted on 02/24/2013 4:54:02 AM PST by ilovesarah2012
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: RoosterRedux

Obama is the only unconstitutional element in the case. This court case is simply his outrage of the day, today an assault upon an institution created by God as a sacred relationship between man and woman, instituted for the purpose of creating family and procreation in a loving supporting social environment.

Eventually the Creator will tire of being taken in vain by these communists, and then will mete out justice with mercy upon those who deny the
Lord and his teaching - remember the first miracle was at Cana.

This is no matter for resolution in legislation and court challenge. This action is an assault on our God given freedoms and His establishment of life on the earth. God will handle the cultural relativism outrage at a personal level with those promoting blasphemy. Believe it.


23 posted on 02/24/2013 5:17:10 AM PST by FlyingEagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ilovesarah2012

Direct your question to the arrogant and condescending poster,10th Amendment.


24 posted on 02/24/2013 5:21:20 AM PST by rbmillerjr (We have No Opposition to Obama's Socialist Agenda)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: ilovesarah2012

I’m sure you were here during the presidential primaries. I left for awhile, I didn’t think my skin was thick enough to stay..


25 posted on 02/24/2013 5:35:16 AM PST by Quickgun (I got here kicking,screaming and covered in someone else's blood. I can go out that way if I have to)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Quickgun

Just doesn’t seem the same as several years ago. We are supposed to be on the same side, but you wouldn’t know it by some of the posts on here. Sad.


26 posted on 02/24/2013 5:37:47 AM PST by ilovesarah2012
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: rbmillerjr

10th Amendment was merely giving you factual, provable information. The vitriol is coming entirely from you and others criticizing him. Perhaps he was condescending to you, but if so that appears to have been the proper approach to take to you since you have nothing but personal insults with which to rebut him.


27 posted on 02/24/2013 5:52:35 AM PST by Doug Loss
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: EQAndyBuzz

Are we to believe that a marriage would have $360,000 in tax relief... or is this just the total taxes she has paid period?


28 posted on 02/24/2013 6:04:21 AM PST by Jumper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: RoosterRedux
The request regarding the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act was made Friday in a brief by Solicitor General Donald Verrilli that argues the law is unconstitutional because it violates "the fundamental guarantee of equal protection."

Well then Donald, it is now also time for you to submit a brief that argues 0bamacare is unconstitutional because it VIOLATES "the fundamental guarantee of equal protection".

Socialist cronies of Barack get 0bamacare waivers while Hobby Lobby takes its economically-harmful and freedom-killing provisions in the a**.

Where is the justice?! Where is the equal protection?!

29 posted on 02/24/2013 6:41:19 AM PST by Servant of the Cross (the Truth will set you free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: zeestephen
Yes, incestrial marriage too if the paraphilia community/pro-Brave New World politicians are honest/consistent. DOMA is a firewall based on previous laws that established penalties or benefits for spouses/joint filing. This is not about the Fed gov. regulating marriage, they already have done that way before DOMA, this is about eradicating the firewall and expanding the definition/who gets covered.

Equal protection does not wash either because a homosexual being has the same right as a heterosexual being in regards of having the same opportunity to marry someone of the opposite sex (DNA not sowed on or cut off genitals).

My take, cut every Federal spousal benefit, get rid of the Social Security Act, Medicare/Medicaid, Federal Welfare programs and streamline the tax laws if the majority (Judges) thinks the Federal gov. should stay out of the marriage business. Of course consistency in our government is severely lacking, mainly do the the ignorance of the "common mans" barking/begging like a trained seal for scraps that representatives throw at them.

30 posted on 02/24/2013 7:36:06 AM PST by rollo tomasi (Working hard to pay for deadbeats and corrupt politicians.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: RoosterRedux

Sodom did not stand forever. God struck it down.


31 posted on 02/24/2013 7:37:55 AM PST by bmwcyle (People who do not study history are destine to believe really ignorant statements.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RoosterRedux
This headline confuses me. Clown in Chief and his Holder already deemed DOMA to be unconstitutional and will not enforce, so why does he need a read from SCOTUS? Isn't the word of Barry the last word?
32 posted on 02/24/2013 7:47:17 AM PST by Cheerio (Barry Hussein Soetoro-0bama=The Complete Destruction of American Capitalism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Amendment10

You might be flamed but I reluctantly agree. Besides the X Amendment there is the full faith and credit clause. In the 40s, 50s and early 60s partners seeking divorce ended up in Reno Nev. States like NY which recognized adultery and physical abuse as the only reasons for dissolution of the marriage still had to recognize Nevada divorces when the parties returned to NY. The purpose of DOMA was to allow states the cover of federal statute if the will of the legislature or polity did not want to accept same sex marriage when those same sex partners returned or moved to their state.


33 posted on 02/24/2013 8:27:14 AM PST by xkaydet65
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: zeestephen

> If the primary argument here is “equal protection,” would
> that not also open a clear legal path for incestuous
> marriage and polygamy?

Yes, as well as polyamory, which is multiple marriage among as many genders as the government recognizes.

And don’t forget pedophilic and bestial marriages, even marriages to blowup dolls.


34 posted on 02/24/2013 8:30:09 AM PST by Westbrook (Children do not divide your love, they multiply it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Doug Loss; rbmillerjr

This is “factual, provable” and not “vitriol”??

Quote from OP:
“The joke is on patriots who don’t bother to read the Constitution.”


35 posted on 02/24/2013 8:30:58 AM PST by Borax Queen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: bmwcyle
Sodom did not stand forever. God struck it down.

The movement started in Babylon California. It has become so wide spread (like a plague), nature and the God of nature will correct it. AIDs was designed by nature to cleanse the disease, but man kind got in the way. Nature will choose a stronger course this time.

I don't think the coastal regions of California will last past this summer, because the nations children are being dragged into this abomination. I see a massive wave coming to cleanse it. No more fooling around. The plates are starting to shrug like crazy already.

God designed nature to cleanse itself, and no man can war with the forces of nature. Nature always wins.

36 posted on 02/24/2013 9:29:45 AM PST by concerned about politics ("Get thee behind me, Liberal")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Rome2000

To #11

Do you know if that is real or photoshopped?


37 posted on 02/24/2013 9:42:14 AM PST by selfdefense
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Lancey Howard

LOL! Funny but not funny.. I thought the same thing. Roberts is a turncoat sissy la-la. The nerve of 0bama to do this, but what else would we expect from our first black, Marxist Muslim gay illegal alien president!


38 posted on 02/24/2013 9:44:35 AM PST by Obama_Is_Sabotaging_America (PRISON AT BENGHAZI?????)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: RoosterRedux

There is no secular argument against gay marriage. The problem with conservatism is that it becoming more and more secular.


39 posted on 02/24/2013 9:47:14 AM PST by DungeonMaster (How does God feel about gay marriage.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Yosemitest

..and you’ve heard too that Orly Taitz says the clerks at SCOTUS did NOT forward critical exhibits of hers to 5 of the Justices!


40 posted on 02/24/2013 9:52:15 AM PST by Obama_Is_Sabotaging_America (PRISON AT BENGHAZI?????)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: RoosterRedux

Bump.


41 posted on 02/24/2013 10:06:13 AM PST by EternalVigilance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rome2000

Where is that photo from?


42 posted on 02/24/2013 10:08:49 AM PST by ColdOne (I miss my poochie... Tasha 2000~3/14/11)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: RoosterRedux

I heard this on the radio yesterday. So depressing.


43 posted on 02/24/2013 10:12:50 AM PST by ColdOne (I miss my poochie... Tasha 2000~3/14/11)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ilovesarah2012
I remember when people on here had civilized discussions and even when they disagreed, they were respectful and polite.

When was that? I've been here 15 years in a couple of months, and I don't remember it.

44 posted on 02/24/2013 10:56:53 AM PST by Cyber Liberty (I am a dissident. Will you join me? My name is John....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: selfdefense; ColdOne

http://nathanbickel.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/obamathat-is-a-white-kufi-on-his-head-the-most-devout-of-muslims-wear-it-this-is-a-picture-i-found-that-was-posted-back-in-2007-regarding-his-campaigning-for-riala-odinga.jpg?w=325&h=244


45 posted on 02/24/2013 11:08:14 AM PST by Rome2000 (THE WASHINGTONIANS AND UNIVERSAL SUFFRAGE ARE THE ENEMY -ROTATE THE CAPITAL AMONGST THE STATES)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Amendment10
So I will reluctantly side with justices who decide that federal DOMA is unconstitutional. The joke is on patriots who don't bother to read the Constitution.

I agree with that too. It's a moral issue and the federal government should not have any business in making laws on moral issues. It should be left entirely to the states.

46 posted on 02/24/2013 11:17:10 AM PST by wastedyears (I'm a gamer not because I choose to have no life, but because I choose to have many.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: wastedyears

If we allow states to refuse to recognize marriages from other states, I’m fine with waving goodbye to DOMA. No coerced reciprocity. If Vermont, say, wants to allow homosexual marriage, let them but don’t force South Carolina to recognize the work product.


47 posted on 02/24/2013 11:47:03 AM PST by Cyber Liberty (I am a dissident. Will you join me? My name is John....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Rome2000

thanks!


48 posted on 02/24/2013 11:54:47 AM PST by ColdOne (I miss my poochie... Tasha 2000~3/14/11)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: rbmillerjr; All
"No. The joke is on people who think they can interpret the Constitution with a straw man 2nd grade interpretation that is best utilized watching cartoons and InfoWars."

instead of resorting to ad hominims to challenge the constitutionally substantiated points that I have made concerning federal marriage laws, I ask if you would please volunteer any clause in the Constitution to substantiate your seeming stance that the states have indeed delegated to Congress the specific power to regulate marriage. (Or do you possibly not understand why the Constitution was made in the first place?)

Otherwise, I have poined out the black and white fact that, since the term "marriage" cannot be found in the Constituton, there is no way that any of the clauses in Section 8 of Article I, or clauses in any other part of the Constitution, can be reasonably construed as an express delegation of power to Congress by the states to address marriage issues, including to define marriage as a one man, one woman union.

In other words, Congress cannot make laws to protect one man, one woman marriage any more than it can make laws regulating our 1st Amendment protections.

And given that the 10th Amendment clarifies that powers not reasonably delegated to Congress are reserved uniquely to the states or the people (paraphrased), it's sad that many of the states, evidently inexcusably unaware that Congress has no constitutional authority to regulate marriage, have foolishly put their faith in the constitutionally indefensible federal DOMA Act, as opposed to making their own 10th Amendment protected laws to protect one-man, one-woman marriage.

Finally, there's been nothing to stop the states from using their unique, Article V power to ratify proposed amendments to the Constitution to do so to make traditional one man, one woman unions a constitutonally protected right. But the fact that Constitution-ignorant patriots applauded Congress for making constitutionally indefensible federal DOMA without a proper amendment to the Constitution to enable Congress to make such legislation means that the Constitution is essentially dead because patriots themselves don't know the Constitution. (Constitutonally ignorant "patriots" arguably deserve corrupt Congress and corrupt presidents.)

49 posted on 02/24/2013 12:19:25 PM PST by Amendment10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Obama_Is_Sabotaging_America

Corruption promotes CORRUPTION !


50 posted on 02/24/2013 2:27:46 PM PST by Yosemitest (It's Simple ! Fight, ... or Die !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-60 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson