2 comments  

The Clinic filed amicus briefs on behalf of the plaintiffs in both cases at earlier stages in the litigation

Media Contact: Public Affairs, 212-854-2650 or publicaffairs@law.columbia.edu

New York, December 7, 2012—The Columbia Law School Sexuality & Gender Law Clinic responds to the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision today to hear United States v. Windsor, a constitutional challenge to the Defense of Marriage Act, and Perry v. Brown, a challenge to Proposition 8, California’s voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage.

“The Court can now write DOMA’s last chapter and put a stop to the federal government’s most explicitly antigay law,” said Suzanne B. Goldberg, Director of the Clinic and of the Law School’s Center for Gender & Sexuality Law and Doris and Herbert Wechsler Clinical Professor of Law.  The Clinic filed an amicus brief in Windsor when the case was before the Second Circuit federal appeals court.

“We are at a major tipping point in the arc of lesbian and gay civil rights,” Goldberg added.  “Congress passed DOMA amidst anger and fear about what might happen if same-sex couples married.  But gay and lesbian couples have been marrying in the U.S. for nearly a decade and there is simply no legitimate reason for the United States to disregard their legally valid marriages, as many federal courts have already recognized.”

Goldberg, whose Clinic also filed an amicus brief in the Perry case, added, “Perry presents an important opportunity for the Court to end marriage discrimination by the states, especially in California, where Proposition 8 took the extra step of stripping marriage rights away from same-sex couples.”

In the Windsor case, the U.S. refused to recognize Edie Windsor’s marriage to Thea Speyer because of DOMA and, when Thea died, sent Edie a $300,000+ tax bill. If the couple’s marriage had been recognized, Windsor would not have faced any taxes on the estate because of the tax code’s marital exemption.  The case is a particularly compelling one as the two women had been a couple for 42 years, from the early 1960s through Speyer’s death in 2009, in a relationship so committed and moving that it became the subject of a widely acclaimed documentary, Edie and Thea.

“With these two cases the Supreme Court can establish and solidify the constitutional standing of lesbian and gay people,” said Katherine Franke, Sulzbacher Professor of Law and Director of Columbia’s Center for Gender & Sexuality Law.  “The time has come for the Court to repudiate the second class citizenship of lesbian and gay people.”

 

# # #

Columbia Law School, founded in 1858, stands at the forefront of legal education and of the law in a global society. Columbia Law School combines traditional strengths in corporate law and financial regulation, international and comparative law, property, contracts, constitutional law, and administrative law with pioneering work in intellectual property, digital technology, tax law and policy, national security, human rights, sexuality and gender, and environmental law.

Join us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter: www.twitter.com/columbialaw

 

 

2 comments

  1. Sexuality & Gender Law Clinic Responds to Supreme Court Decision to Review Same-Sex Marriage Cases http://t.co/aLv8UVnh via @sharethis

  2. “The Supreme Court can establish & solidify the constitutional standing of lesbian and gay people,” Katherine Franke. http://t.co/aLv8UVnh

Add a comment


Comments are subject to moderation and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of
Columbia Law School or Columbia University.

FEATURED POSTS

CATEGORY CLOUD

"Homeland" Security Abortion Rights Adoption adultery Affordable Care Act Alien Tort Claims Act Amicus Brief Asylum Bankruptcy BDS Bullying Census Politics Children Citizenship Civil Unions Columbia Law School Compulsory Marriage Condoms Contraception Contraception Mandate Cordoba House Criminal Law Cures for Homosexuality Defense of Marriage Act Disability Rights Discrimination Divorce Domestic Partnership Domestic Violence Domestic Workers Don't Ask Don't Tell Economic Justice Education Egypt Elections Employment Discrimination ENDA Estate Planning Events Family Law Fellowships femininity Free Speech Gender and Technology Gender Identity Discrimination Gendering the Economy GSL Online Haiti Hate Crimes Health Care Hilary Clinton Hillary Clinton HIV HIV Discrimination Hobby Lobby Homelessness Homophobia Housing Human Rights Identity Politics Illegitimacy (sic) Immigration Reform In-ing Incest India International Law Islamophobia Israel Justice Sotomayor King & Spalding Labor Trafficking Land Reform Law School Legal Profession Legal Scholarship Lesbian & Gay Parenting LGBT Parenting Marital Status Discrimination Marriage Masculinity Medicaid Michelle Obama Migration Military National Security Obama Administration Obama Appointments Outing OWS Palestine Parenting Pinkwashing Policing Politics of the Veil Polyamory Popular Culture Pornograpy Pregnancy Presidential Politics Prisons Privacy Products Liability Profanity Prop 8 Prosecutorial Discretion Publications Public Rights/Private Conscience Queer Theory Queer vs. Gay Rights Race and Racism Racial Stereotyping Rape Religion Religious Accommodation Religious Exemption Religious Freedom Restoration Act Religious Fundamentalism Reproductive Rights Reproductive Technology RFRA Romania Rwanda Sartorial Commentary Schools Sex Discrimination Sex Education Sex Stereotyping Sexting Sex Trafficking Sexual Assault Sexual Duplicity Sexual Harassment Sexual Health Sexuality and Gender Law Clinic Sexual Orientation Discrimination Sex Work SMUG Sodomy Law Reform Sports Supreme Court Surrogacy Technology Title IX Trafficking Transgender Uganda Uncategorized Violence Women and Poverty Women of Color Zimbabwe

Academic Calendar  |  Resources for Employers  |  Campus Map & Directory  |  Columbia University  |  Jobs at Columbia  |  Contact Us

© Copyright 2009, Columbia Law School. For questions or comments, please contact the webmaster.