It's certainly a great thing for an ex-president to weigh in with a reversal and give his opinion to the Supreme Court. And I commend Clinton for his evolution. But that doesn't remove this damaging act from Clinton's legacy.
We've come a great distance from those lopsided House and Senate votes in 1996 in support of the discriminatory and unconstitutional so-called Defense of Marriage Act. Still, the discrimination of this law and the harms it causes tens of thousands of American families remains.
The bulk of the plaintiffs' brief focuses on Prop 8 as a violation of equal protection rights. This is the course most legal observers expect the Supreme Court to take in its eventual decision on Prop 8.
The brief authoritatively dismantles claims that same-sex marriage harms children and that kids "do better with a mother and a father," and it specifically repudiates the junk-science "study" of gay parenting published last year by researcher Mark Regnerus, an ASA member.
The Defense of Marriage Act forces employers to treat married same-sex couples differently from married straight couples. For example, because of DOMA, employers must withhold more from the paychecks of married gay employees than from those of married straight employees.
The new media were ablaze on the evening of February 22 after U.S. Solicitor General Donald Verrilli filed a brief in United States v. Windsor asking the Supreme Court to overturn Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).