DOMA case and the Tenth Amendment

July 9th, 2010 admin

(David Kopel) Jack Balkin has an interesting post on today’s two Defense of Marriage Act cases from the federal District of Massachusetts, Gill v. Office of Personnel Management , and Massachusetts v. HHS . The latter case found DOMA unconstitutional, as applied to Massachusetts, because DOMA violates the Tenth Amendment by infringing the state’s traditional core sovereign power of defining lawful marriages. The most important parts of the Tenth Amendment analysis are at pages 28–36 of the opinion. Balkin is concerned because the Judge Tauro’s “Tenth Amendment arguments prove entirely too much. As …


Originally posted on Volokh

 
  Related Posts
Breaking: Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) Held Unconstitutional
Breaking: Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) Held Unconstitutional
A federal judge in Boston — Judge Joseph L. Tauro (D. Mass.), appointed to the bench by President Nixon back in 1972 — just struck down down Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). As you may recall, DOMA is the 1996 law that effectively bans recognition of same-sex marriages for purposes of federal law. The last substantive... 
A Tenth Amendment Win for Liberals? Yes, If it Holds Up
Does Thursday’s ruling in Massachusetts actually herald a new legal weapon for proponents of gay marriage rights: the Tenth Amendment? Nobody’s counting any chickens until after the appeal.  Read More →
Obama’s DOMA Dilemma
The Obama administration is defending in a Massachusetts federal court a law that it believes it should be appealed. The law: DOMA, or the Defense of Marriage Act, the 1996 federal law that defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman.  Read More →
Gun Show Second Amendment Case Remanded Back to Original Panel — Gun Show Organizers Unlikely to Win There
(Eugene Volokh) In early 2009, a 3-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled (in Nordyke v. King ) that the Second Amendment was applicable to state and local governments. But the panel also ruled that a county ban on gun possession in county parks and fairgrounds was constitutional , because such property fell within the... 
The Second Amendment and Unmarked Firearms
(Orin Kerr) The Third Circuit has handed down an interesting Second Amendment decision, United States v. Marzzarella . It begins: This appeal presents a single issue, whether Defendant Michael Marzzarella’s conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 922(k) for possession of a handgun with an obliterated serial number violates his Second Amendment right to keep... 
The Flawed Antitrust Economics of the Durbin Price Control Amendment:
(Todd Zywicki) Josh Wright and I have a column in today’s Washington Times critiquing the economics of the Durbin interchange fees price control amendment .  There are some interesting theoretical arguments about interchange fees (and very little empirical arguments).  The argument that the market is a “duopoly” that exploits merchants, however,... 
Fourth Amendment Stunner: Judge Rules That Cell-Site Data Protected By Fourth Amendment Warrant Requirement
(Orin Kerr) A few federal court opinions have been making a big public splash recently by taking surprising positions on how the Fourth Amendment applies to location surveillance.   The latest opinion in the line is Magistrate Judge James Orenstein ’s decision in In The Matter Of An Application Of The United States Of America And Order For An Order... 
First Amendment left intact
Refusing to remove another form of expression from the protection of the First Amendment, the Supreme Court on Tuesday ruled 8-1 that the government lacks the power to outlaw expressions of animal cruelty, when that is done in videotapes and other commercial media.  The Court noted that it had previously withdrawn “a few historic categories”... 
"Scott Matheson — Excellent Nomination for the Tenth Circuit"
“Scott Matheson — Excellent Nomination for the Tenth Circuit”: Paul Cassell has this post at “The Volokh Conspiracy.”  Read More →
"[This is] the only case I know of, in any jurisdiction covered by the Fourth Amendment, where invasion of the home has been approved based on no showing whatsoever. Nada. Gar nichts. Rien du tout. Bupkes."
“[This is] the only case I know of, in any jurisdiction covered by the Fourth Amendment, where invasion of the home has been approved based on no showing whatsoever. Nada. Gar nichts. Rien du tout. Bupkes.” So writes Chief Judge Alex Kozinski , dissenting today from the Ninth Circuit ’s denial of rehearing en banc in a case. In something... 
  Related Tweets from Twitter
7thAmendmentAdv (7thAmendmentAdvocate)  : Shariah Kills, Enslaves, & Denies Constitutional Rights & They're Angry About Koran Burning??!! http://bit.ly/cZOdz7 #shariah #tgp #tcot..
Updated : 2010-09-08T16:37:29Z   |  Reply  |  View Tweet
Alex_73 (Alex)  : Constitutional Law..
Updated : 2010-09-08T16:33:09Z   |  Reply  |  View Tweet
emilybabay (Emily Babay)  : The GPS story is one of my favorites that I've written recently. I think constitutional law stories are beyond fascinating...
Updated : 2010-09-08T13:58:06Z   |  Reply  |  View Tweet
R8YP (Rate Your Politician)  : RT @Politics_co_uk: Pressure grows for reform of murder law: The pressure for Britain's murder law to become more flexible is growing,... ht..
Updated : 2010-09-08T13:42:08Z   |  Reply  |  View Tweet
InGaltsGulch (Nicole J. P.)  : Oh joy, a progressive Constitutional Law professor..
Updated : 2010-09-08T13:41:14Z   |  Reply  |  View Tweet
  Related News from Digg
No comments yet.

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree

TOP