"We conclude that Section 3 of the (DOMA) violates equal protection and is unconstitutional"

[bigtree]

Federal Appeals Court: DOMA Is Unconstitutional

“We conclude that Section 3 of the 5 Defense of Marriage Act violates equal protection and is 6 therefore unconstitutional.” The Second Circuit Court of Appeals, out of New York, is the second federal court to hold the 1996 federal definition of “marriage” unconstitutional, but Supreme Court appeals are pending.

read court decision/opinion: http://www.buzzfeed.com/chrisgeidner/federal-appeals-court-doma-is-unconstitutional

[msanthrope]

1. The decision reads like a thing of beauty. I mean, it is amazingly well written.

Well done, 2nd Circuit!!!

[bigtree]

3. I agree, msanthrope

'amazingly well written'

I don't think that many advocates outside of the court could have written a more detailed, subjective, instructive, and encompassing decision.

[msanthrope]

5. It's written for Scalia and Alito. They won't be able to refute it. nt

[bigtree]

6. they're going to be too preoccupied

. . . trying to accommodate or adopt that rambling, incoherent, confused dissent.

[porphyrian]

2. . n/t

[nadinbrzezinski]

4. And brains explode over this activist judge

Who happens to be real conservative.

[bigtree]

7. kick