There are lot of good reasons for marriage equality to be federalized at this point, but among the most compelling legal arguments is that the patchwork of equality in the U.S. now is creating confusion and hardship for thousands of couples. That's because three federal programs, the Department of Veterans Affairs, the Social Security Administration and the Railroad Retirement Board all interpret a section of U.S. code known as Title 38 to rely on a couple’s state of residence when making benefits decisions. If a couple is married in one state, but resides in another that doesn't recognize that marriage, the marriage doesn't exist in the eyes of these agencies.
Here's some examples of what can happen because of that.
Air Force Capt. Carlos Wilkinson, who married his same-sex partner on July 27, 2013, a month and a day after the Windsor ruling. The couple married in California but now lives in Nevada, where gay marriage is not legal.
When Wilkinson and his husband, Wray, applied for a VA backed home loan in 2013, the VA said it could guaranty only half the funds, due to Nevada’s marriage laws. If Wilkinson had filed as a single applicant or was in a heterosexual marriage, the VA would have backed the entire loan. […]
In North Carolina, for example, Richard Jernigan is hoping for a spousal supplement through his retired husband’s Social Security benefits.
Jernigan inherited his mother’s house, but he said the home needs constant repairs and maintenance. He earns about $150 a month auditing customer service through a mystery shopper program. Social Security adds another $600 to the couple’s monthly income, but the amount could be about 25 percent higher with a spousal supplement.
“That money would be a tremendous help,” Jernigan said. “We are literally in a state of poverty, and yet we don’t qualify for any of the other assistance because they don’t count us as married.”
A number of bills have been introduced in the House and Senate—all from Democrats—to rectify this federal discrimination, discrimination presumably struck down by the Supreme Court when it struck down a section of the Defense of Marriage Act defining marriage as only between a man and a woman for federal benefits purposes in the
Windsor case. But since the Court didn't rule on whether states have to recognize marriages from other states. The Court is going to have to ultimately decide this one, since there's no way a broken Congress will deal with it any time soon. But this ongoing disparity under the lawmakers for an even more compelling case for all of the challenges winding their way to the Supreme Court.