<tt id="6hsgl"><pre id="6hsgl"><pre id="6hsgl"></pre></pre></tt>
          <nav id="6hsgl"><th id="6hsgl"></th></nav>
          国产免费网站看v片元遮挡,一亚洲一区二区中文字幕,波多野结衣一区二区免费视频,天天色综网,久久综合给合久久狠狠狠,男人的天堂av一二三区,午夜福利看片在线观看,亚洲中文字幕在线无码一区二区
          USEUROPEAFRICAASIA 中文雙語Fran?ais
          World
          Home / World / Americas

          US Supreme Court delivers wins for gay marriage movement

          Agencies | Updated: 2013-06-27 15:22

          WASHINGTON - The US Supreme Court on Wednesday handed a significant victory to gay rights advocates by recognizing that married gay men and women are eligible for federal benefits and paving the way for same-sex marriage in California.

          The court, however, fell short of a landmark ruling endorsing a fundamental right for gay people to marry.

          The two cases, both decided on 5-4 votes, concerned the constitutionality of a key part of a federal law, the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), that denied benefits to same-sex married couples and a California state law enacted in 2008, called Proposition 8, that banned gay marriage.

          Gay marriage is an issue that stirs cultural, religious and political passions in the United States as elsewhere. Gay marriage advocates celebrated outside the courthouse. An enormous cheer went up as word arrived that DOMA had been struck down. "DOMA is dead!" the crowd chanted, as couples hugged and cried.

          "Our marriage has not been recognized until today," said Patricia Lambert, 59, who held her wife, Kathy Mulvey, 47. A South African, Lambert said she no longer would have to worry about being forced to leave the country if her work visa expired.

          The court struck down the federal law as a violation of the US Constitution's guarantee of equal protection under the law but ducked a ruling on Proposition 8 by finding that supporters of the law did not have standing to appeal a federal district court ruling that struck the law down.

          While the ruling on DOMA was clearcut, questions remained about what exactly the Proposition 8 ruling will mean on the ground. There is likely to be more litigation over whether the district court ruling applies statewide.

          After hearing of the California ruling outside the courthouse, Anthony Romero, the executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union, said the fight for gay marriage would head back to the states.

          "We take it to the states - state by state, legislature by legislature, governor by governor, and constitutional amendment by constitutional amendment," he said.

          EQUAL PROTECTION

          In the DOMA case, Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote for the majority that the federal law, as passed by Congress in 1996, violated the US Constitution's guarantee of equal protection.

          "The federal statute is invalid, for no legitimate purpose overcomes the purpose and effect to disparage and to injure those whom the state, by its marriage laws, sought to protect in personhood and dignity," Kennedy wrote.

          Kennedy, often the court's swing vote in close decisions, also said the law imposes "a stigma upon all who enter into same-sex marriages made lawful by the unquestioned authority of the states."

          Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Antonin Scalia both wrote dissenting opinions.

          Roberts himself wrote the Proposition 8 opinion, ruling along procedural lines with the court split in an unusual way.

          Twelve of the 50 states and the District of Columbia recognize gay marriage; more than 30 states prohibit it, and others have laws somewhere in-between.

          Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act limited the definition of marriage as between a man and a woman for the purposes of federal benefits. By striking down Section 3, the court cleared the way to more than 1,100 federal benefits, rights and burdens linked to marriage status.

          As a result of Wednesday's ruling, Edith Windsor of New York, who was married to a woman and sued the government to get the federal estate tax deduction available to heterosexuals when their spouses pass away, will be able to claim a $363,000 tax refund. ? ?

          The cases are United States v. Windsor, US Supreme Court, No. 12-307 and Hollingsworth v. Perry, US Supreme Court, No. 12-144.

          Most Viewed in 24 Hours
          Copyright 1995 - . All rights reserved. The content (including but not limited to text, photo, multimedia information, etc) published in this site belongs to China Daily Information Co (CDIC). Without written authorization from CDIC, such content shall not be republished or used in any form. Note: Browsers with 1024*768 or higher resolution are suggested for this site.
          License for publishing multimedia online 0108263

          Registration Number: 130349
          FOLLOW US
          主站蜘蛛池模板: 公交车最后一排| 97人妻免费碰视频碰免| 重口SM一区二区三区视频| 日韩av一区二区精品不卡| 久久精品国产只有精品96| 亚洲熟妇自偷自拍另欧美| 国产一级精品在线免费看| av中文字幕在线二区| 国产精品一区二区久久毛片| 欧美国产综合视频| 免费中文字幕无码视频| √天堂中文www官网在线| 亚洲av永久无码天堂影院| 婷婷丁香五月亚洲中文字幕| 国产精品久久久久婷婷五月 | 国内精品综合九九久久精品| 亚洲国产成人精品女人久久久| 51福利国产在线观看午夜天堂| 99亚洲男女激情在线观看| 亚洲高清aⅴ日本欧美视频| 欧美在线观看www| 国内极度色诱视频网站| 亚洲视频第一页在线观看| 91久久国产成人免费观看| 亚洲欧美偷拍另类A∨| 日本午夜精品一区二区| 精品国产一区二区色老头| 啊┅┅快┅┅用力啊岳网站| 国产成人久视频免费| 中文字幕国产精品综合| 国产欧美久久一区二区三区| 亚洲国产成人无码av在线播放| 国产大陆av一区二区三区| 欧美一a级做爰片大开眼界| 玩弄丰满少妇人妻视频| 四房播色| 国产69久久精品成人看| av在线网站手机播放| 成人国产激情福利久久精品| 最新亚洲av日韩av二区| 色综合天天综合婷婷伊人|