<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: 久久亚洲欧美日本精品| 欧美日韩中文国产一区| 久久婷婷五月综合97色直播| 亚洲精品理论电影在线观看| 83午夜电影免费| 国产精品白浆无码流出| 2021国产精品视频网站| 手机在线观看av片| 成人无码潮喷在线观看| 国产乱码一区二区免费| 丝袜美腿亚洲综合第一区| 国产99视频精品免费视频76| 国产精品国产三级国产试看| 男人进女人下部全黄大色视频 | 亚洲最大福利视频网| 久久精品夜夜夜夜夜久久| freechinese麻豆| 香蕉EEWW99国产精选免费| 日本特黄特色aaa大片免费| 久久蜜臀av一区三区| 国产精品论一区二区三区| 亚洲精品一区二区三天美| 久久精品人人做人人爽97| 精品午夜福利在线视在亚洲| 97中文字幕在线观看| 野花在线观看免费观看高清| 亚洲人成网站18禁止无码| 久久精品99久久久久久久久| 亚洲中文字幕在线二页| 亚洲精品国产三级在线观看| 国产91午夜福利精品| 国产精品亚洲А∨天堂免| 亚洲一国产一区二区三区| 久久精品国产亚洲精品2020| 久久精品国产亚洲av亚| 婷婷精品国产亚洲av在线观看| 边吻奶边挵进去gif动态图| 日本一卡二卡3卡四卡网站精品| 国产美女69视频免费观看| 国产在线一区二区在线视频| 国产亚洲无线码一区二区|