Is DOMA Crumbling?

The Southern District of New York issued its opinion yesterday (June 6, 2012) in Windsor v. United States, No. 10 CIV. 8435(BSJ), 2012 WL 2019716 (S.D. N.Y. June 6, 2012), holding that the Defense of Marriage Act  is unconstitutional to the extent that it denies the estate tax marital deduction to a couple who is legally married under applicable state law.

Unlike the recent decision of the First Circuit in Massachusetts v. United States Dept. of Health and Human Services, 2012 WL 1948017 (1st Cir. 2012), discussed here, the court in Windsor found that DOMA failed even the least stringent test of constitutionality — that it is not rationally related to a legitimate state interest.  The court admitted, for sake of argument, that some of the rationales given by Congress for DOMA might be legitimate state interests, but held that the approach taken by DOMA was not rationally related to achieving those aims.

Special thanks to Howard M. Zaritsky (Estate Planning Attorney, Rapidan, Virginia) for providing this summary.