Court ruling: Victory for same-sex marriage rights
2013Ann Montague 2013-07Read it in the scan (PDF at ETOL), page 5 →
The words are the paper's own, from its digital file; the division into articles was made by machine, so a box or caption can end up inside the article next to it.
Scan page 5
On June 26 the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the Defense Of Marriage Act (DOMA) as uncon stitutional. This legislation was promoted and signed by President Bill Clinton in 1996 and denies any of the over 1100 federal ben efits to same-sex couples.
The Court’s 5-4 majority deci sion was clear and simple. Writing for the majority, Justice Anthony Kennedy described DOMA as im posing “a disadvantage, a sepa rate status, and so a stigma upon all who enter into same-sex mar riages made lawful by the unques tioned authority of the States.” This, he said, violates the right to liberty and equal protection under the law.
The decision means that in the 12 states and the District of Columbia where same-sex marriage is legal, those couples will qualify for all federal benefits currently available to hetero sexual couples. Other states, however, may still define “marriage” as they choose.
The Supreme Court also tossed out California’s Proposition 8 on technical grounds, which let stand the opinion of the U.S. Court of Appeals in regard to a legal suit against the referendum measure. If Prop. 8 had been allowed to become state law, it would have re voked the right of same-sex couples to have their marriages recognized in California.
Days later, on June 28, the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court confirmed that the stay had been lifted, which immediately prompted a wave of same-sex wed dings throughout the state. And on June 30, Supreme Court Justice Kennedy is sued a denial of a last-ditch appeal by proponents of Prop. 8 to have the Court overrule the Ninth Circuit ruling.
Nadine Smith of Equality Florida spoke for many when she posted a video saying, “We are left out and left behind.” But these decisions are still victories that should be celebrated.
For those of us who never would have chosen gay marriage as a defining issue of our movement, the fact is that huge members of our brothers and sisters did choose it. There was a mass move ment in our community and they were energized around an act of civil disobe dience.
I was living in a small coastal town in Oregon when the mayor of San Fran cisco in 2004 directed city offices to is sue marriage licenses to same-sex cou ples in violation of state law. My first thought was, “That’s nice.” But I soon saw that something else was happen Wing as I watched the huge num bers of people line up and wait for hours to fill out their paperwork. And then couples in my small town and elsewhere in Oregon would call me and say, “We are go ing to San Francisco and wait in line as long as it takes.”
It had become a mass move ment of people standing up for equality and against discrimina tion. Surely, ending employment discrimination was more impor tant. But Marriage Equality was moving people, a lot of people. In the beginning there were no ma jor LGBT organizations, NGOs, or self-serving politicians creating this movement.
After the decisions were an nounced, it was encouraging to watch the interviews with the plaintiffs, lawyers, and demonstrators who all spoke about the people in the 38 states that are left out of these de cisions. There was also talk about the “momentum” that these decisions have created for other issues—first and fore most, the pressure to pass the Employ ment Nondiscrimination Act (ENDA).
For at least two people, the Supreme Court decisions had an immediate ef fect. Within 30 minutes of the DOMA ruling, a New York City immigration judge stopped deportation proceed ings for a Columbian man married to a gay U.S. citizen. n SOCIALIST ACTION JULY 2013 5
Scan page 6
The roots of the economic crisis in the United States how capitalism works. Tony Savino / Socialist Action (Left) Actors parody the bankers at Wall Street protest in 2008.
But even with European imports from the U.S. exceeding exports, European capitalist economies benefited. Retail sales in Europe of American as well as their own goods expanded their econo mies and provided employment. The Europeans invested a good portion of their profits into capital technology to increase their own manufacturing in dustries.
And so, slowly but surely, Europe and Japan eventually caught up, mostly through technological advances in pro duction that effectively equaled and in some sectors exceeded U.S. productivity and quality of goods. The United States still ruled supreme through the 1960s— with some European and Japanese products, such as VW bugs and Honda motorcycles, beginning to do quite well in the U.S. marketplace.
The latter part of the 1960s marked a kind of turning point: first of all, infla tion related to large budget deficits from the Vietnam War spending occurred. (Large budget deficits meant the gov ernment had to print and borrow more money to cover the deficits; the increase of the money supply devalued each dol lar’s worth and hence prices resulting from the oversupply went up.)