Related articles and links |  1 of 2

The Republican Congress and the Democratic White House found a rare patch of political common ground on the cusp of the November election with enactment of the Defense of Marriage Act.

President Clinton signed the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), the first federal law to define marriage officially as a "union between one man and one woman." The legislation comes as the issue of same-sex marriage continues to be debated in many sectors of society, from the church to the corporate world.

Under DOMA, a bill actively pushed by a coalition of pro-family groups led by the Family Research Council (FRC), homosexual couples would be denied spousal benefits from such federal programs as social security or Medicare. The law also holds that no state can be required to recognize the validity of a same-sex marriage that may have been sanctioned in another state.

A pending Hawaii court case had pro-DOMA forces concerned that a ruling on the island could force other states to accept homosexual unions (ct, March 4, 1996, p. 64). Under the Constitution's "full faith and credit" provision, states are required to recognize "public acts, records, and judicial proceedings" from other states.

DEFENSIVE MEASURE: DOMA moved to a legislative fast track in the waning days of the Republican-controlled congressional session. The measure passed the Senate in an 85-to-14 vote on September 10. At the same time, the Senate voted 50 to 49 against an Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) amendment introduced by Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) that would have banned workplace discrimination against homosexuals and lesbians. DOMA passed the House on July 12 by a 342-to-67 margin.

As its title suggests, DOMA is largely a defensive measure, aimed at slowing what pro-family activists see as growing social and legal legitimacy for same-sex marriages.

On May 20, in Romer v. Evans, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a constitutional amendment in Colorado that refused to consider homosexuals in the same classification as race- or gender-based discrimination (CT, June 17, 1996, p. 68).

Some legal scholars believe the Supreme Court's decision could have significant ramifications for proposed homosexual marriages. "With this move, the Court may have armed federal judges to tie up any legislation in a state that refused to honor homosexual marriages," says Hadley Arkes, professor of jurisprudence and American institutions at Amherst College.

Currently, no state officially recognizes same-sex marriages. However, in the landmark federal court case in Hawaii, three homosexual couples are suing the state for the right to marry.

Arkes calls DOMA "the most delicate and limited measure" that Congress could adopt on the issue of same-sex marriages. "The states that wish to honor gay marriage will suffer no restriction in this measure, but on the other hand, this provision … may supply the only ground of support for a state in refusing to credit same-sex marriage—especially if a federal court moves to strip from a state every other source of resistance."

HOMOSEXUALS AT WORK: Clinton signed DOMA into law on September 21 at 12:50 a.m.—an apparent attempt to lessen media coverage and political fallout. However, the administration continues to send conflicting signals on homosexual rights. White House officials welcomed the Romer v. Evans ruling and urged Congress to pass ENDA. After Clinton signed DOMA, a White House spokesperson called for new legislation to ensure homosexual rights in the workplace.

next page... |  1 of 2

share this page

October 28 1996, Vol. 40, No. 12