Published July 8, 2010
A U.S. judge in Boston has ruled that a federal gay marriage ban is unconstitutional because it interferes with the right of a state to define marriage.
U.S. District Judge Joseph Tauro on Thursday ruled in favor of gay couples’ rights in two separate challenges to the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act, known as DOMA.
Huge story. My notes and questions:
- One year ago, almost to the day, WBUR interviewed Coakley about this first-in-the-nation case.
- The Globe reports: “A Justice Department spokeswoman, Tracy Schmaler, declined to comment on Tauro’s ruling, saying in a statement, ‘We’re reviewing the decision.’ “
- TPM reports. Read the comments for an interesting discussion about the federal implications. (It’s confusing.)
- Coakley issues a statement praising the ruling.
- Coakley is holding a news conference tonight at 7. We are sending one or two reporters. Our Sonari Glinton is on a conference call with GLAD, one of the plaintiffs.
- This is an important point: The judge ruled that 1) the federal government does not have the right define marriage, and 2) the law is discriminatory. The ruling does not “legalize gay marriage.” Nothing comes crashing down at this point.
- The judge actually issued rulings on two separate but related federal cases — one brought by Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley, the other by GLAD, the New England gay-rights organization.
- A lawyer for GLAD says the ruling is narrow and applies only in Massachusetts.
Here is Judge Tauro’s ruling.