Send an email to when Equalitopia launches.
Equalitopia.com Twitter Facebook deviantART

Equalitopia

BLOG
Equalitopia is an application that will organize and analyze the LGBT movement around the world.
Judge: US federal gay marriage ban unconstitutional
In a step forward for marriage equality, a United States judge in Boston ruled—in two separate cases—that the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) is unconstitutional.
According to AP, in one case, Joseph Tauro, Massachusetts district judge, ruled that Congress violated the constitution when it passed DOMA, as it interferes with the state’s right to define marriage.
 
He said that the act forces Massachusetts to discriminate against its citizens.

“In the wake of DOMA, it is only sexual orientation that differentiates a married couple entitled to federal marriage-based benefits from one not so entitled, and this court can conceive of no way in which such a difference might be relevant to the provision of the benefits at issue.”

In another case filed by Gays & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders, Tauro ruled that DOMA violates the equal protection clause of the U.S. Constitution.
Read the full 39-page court decision »

Judge: US federal gay marriage ban unconstitutional

In a step forward for marriage equality, a United States judge in Boston ruled—in two separate cases—that the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) is unconstitutional.

According to AP, in one case, Joseph Tauro, Massachusetts district judge, ruled that Congress violated the constitution when it passed DOMA, as it interferes with the state’s right to define marriage.

He said that the act forces Massachusetts to discriminate against its citizens.

“In the wake of DOMA, it is only sexual orientation that differentiates a married couple entitled to federal marriage-based benefits from one not so entitled, and this court can conceive of no way in which such a difference might be relevant to the provision of the benefits at issue.”

In another case filed by Gays & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders, Tauro ruled that DOMA violates the equal protection clause of the U.S. Constitution.

Read the full 39-page court decision »

danlev Posted by Dan Leveille on July 8th, 2010 at 6:46pm

Tags

Social Media Response

Comments

blog comments powered by Disqus

89 notes

  1. musicismylife0409 reblogged this from captainstevexxx
  2. captainstevexxx reblogged this from himynamesdylan
  3. rentboyblog reblogged this from danielextra
  4. parkuhr reblogged this from danlev
  5. thecaleb reblogged this from amycarr
  6. chocolatemakeseverythingbetter reblogged this from sofapizza
  7. tenebear reblogged this from danielextra
  8. cloudsurfer reblogged this from sofapizza
  9. 148km reblogged this from sofapizza
  10. xxsayitstruexx reblogged this from sofapizza
  11. elfrankenstein reblogged this from sofapizza
  12. kyliebbycks reblogged this from sofapizza
  13. dahkness reblogged this from sofapizza
  14. norahsweeney reblogged this from sofapizza
  15. amycarr reblogged this from sofapizza
  16. glassarmshattering reblogged this from sofapizza
  17. sofapizza reblogged this from equalitopia
  18. themonicabird reblogged this from equalitopia
  19. newfounddebauchery reblogged this from equalitopia
  20. danielextra reblogged this from equalitopia and added:
    “In the wake of DOMA, it is only sexual orientation that differentiates a married couple entitled to federal...