Ruling against marriage law sets stage for next fight

Ruling says same-sex spouses are entitled to federal benefits

Appeals court says law that defines marriage as between a man and woman discriminates against gay couples by denying them federal benefits. Case likely to go to Supreme Court.

A federal appeals court in Boston ruled Thursday that the Defense of Marriage Act, passed by Congress in 1996, unconstitutionally discriminates against married gay couples by denying them federal benefits available to heterosexual unions.

The unanimous decision by a three-judge panel of the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sets the stage for a Supreme Court review of the law, signed by President Clinton, that defines marriage as between a man and a woman.

The appeals court sided with a lower-court judge who ruled in 2010 that the law denies married gay couples benefits available to married heterosexual couples such as the ability to file joint tax returns.

The case was brought by seven married same-sex couples and argued by Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders, a Boston-based legal rights organization.

“This is a strong opinion,” said Mary Bonauto, who argued the case for the group. “Congress does not get to put its ‘thumb on the scales,’ as the court put it, simply because it does not agree with Massachusetts’ decision to allow loving and committed same-sex couples to marry.’’

The group argued that because of the law, same-sex married couples in states where such unions are permitted are denied federal benefits

“For me, it’s more just about having equality.” Jonathan Knight, plaintiff

including Social Security protections and access to family health coverage as well as joint tax-filing status.

The Alliance Defense Fund, a group of Christian lawyers who support the federal law, said it expects the Supreme Court will reverse the appeals panel and uphold the law’s constitutionality.

“Society should protect and strengthen marriage, not undermine it,’’ said Dale Schowengerdt, legal counsel for the fund.

Schowengerdt said that under the appeals court’s rationale, “if just one state decided to accept polygamy, the federal government and perhaps other states would be forced to accept it, too.’’

Since Congress passed the law, eight states have permitted samesex marriage, starting with Massachusetts in 2004, while many other states have prohibited it.

Others that have legalized samesex marriage are Connecticut, Iowa, Maryland, New Hampshire, New York, Vermont, Washington state and the District of Columbia. Maryland and Washington’s laws are not yet in effect.

“For me, it’s more just about having equality and not having a system of first- and second-class marriages,” said plaintiff Jonathan Knight, 32, who married Marlin Nabors in 2006.