Skip to main content

View Diary: DOJ’s DOMA Decision, Once A Ripple, Now A Wave? (56 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  UAFA is a making the "equal" part (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Clarknt67

    a little less of a lie. It doesn't establish or enforce the "separate" part.

    Eliminating DOMA is clearly necessary. It's an abomination. Any decision to mitigate the effects of the abomination until it's gone is clearly welcome, but the abomination is still there.

    I guess there's an argument that without DOMA, in the eyes of the US (and in particular, the USCIS), all couples who otherwise meet the definition of "permanent partner" would in fact legally able to marry, by travelling to a state that would marry them. Under that interpretation, UAFA would become a nullity post-DOMA. Under the interpretation that law of the couple's state of residence is the applicable law for interpreting the "unable to contract" term in UAFA, the language is a little vague but it'd be hard to argue that DPs don't qualify:

           (52) The term `permanent partner' means an individual 18 years of age or older who--

                (A) is in a committed, intimate relationship with another individual 18 years of age or older in which both parties intend a lifelong commitment;

                (B) is financially interdependent with that other individual;

                (C) is not married to or in a permanent partnership with anyone other than that other individual;

                (D) is unable to contract with that other individual a marriage cognizable under this Act; and

                (E) is not a first, second, or third degree blood relation of that other individual.

            (53) The term `permanent partnership' means the relationship that exists between two permanent partners.

    There's no mention of domestic partnerships or civil unions anywhere in the bill, but it's clearly the intent to recognize them. You'd hope that the rulemaking would clarify that a DP would be evidence of satisfying criteria (A) and (B) at a minimum.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site