6.26, 13 결혼을 인간의 자유의 문제로 접근하는 것과 신의 섭리로 보는 관점에서의 차이, 그러나 진리를 분명히 인식해야, 인간의 자유를 위해 인간은 스스로 신이 되어 가고 있다

Supreme Court strikes down Defense of Marriage Act

Video: A largely jubilant crowd reacted Wednesday morning after the Supreme Court struck down the Defense of Marriage Act.

By Robert Barnes, Updated: Wednesday, June 26, 10:08 AM E-mail the writer

The Supreme Court Wednesday struck down as unconstitutional the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act that denies federal benefits to same-sex couples who are legally married in the states where they reside.
The decision was 5 to 4, with Justice Anthony M. Kennedy joining the court’s liberals to form the majority. It did not address the question of whether there was a constitutional right to same-sex marriages

 

 

But the court said it violated equal protection to provide benefits to heterosexual couples while denying them to gay couples in the 12 states plus the District of Columbia where same-sex couples may marry.
“DOMA instructs all federal officials, and indeed all persons with whom same-sex couples interact, including their own children, that their marriage is less worthy than the marriages of others,” Kennedy wrote.
“The federal statute is invalid, for no legitimate purpose overcomes the purpose and effect to disparage and to injure those whom the State, by its marriage laws, sought to protect in personhood and dignity.”
The 1996 law passed by bipartisan majorities in Congress and signed by President Bill Clinton recognized marriage as only between one man and one woman. It passed at a time when same-sex marriage was not legal anywhere in the world.
Kennedy was joined by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen G. Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan.
Justice Antonin Scalia read a lengthy and scathing dissent from the bench, saying the court should have left the matter for Congress to settle and had unfairly labeled proponents of traditional marriage as bigots.
“In the majority’s telling, this story is black and white: hate your neighbor or come along with us,” Scalia said. “It is hard to admit that one’s political opponents are not monsters, especially in a struggle like this one, and the challenge in the end proves more than today’s court can handle.”
Chief Justice John G. Roberts and Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr. also dissented.
Roberts wrote separately to emphasize that the opinion did not address a broader right to marriage.
“We may in the future have to resolve challenges to state marriage definitions affecting same-sex couples,” Roberts wrote. “That issue, however, is not before us in this case.”
The case was brought by 83-year-old Edith Windsor, who married Thea Spyer, her partner of more than 40 years, in Canada in 2007. Both were residents of New York. When Spyer died in 2009, she left her estate to Windsor.
At that time, the state of New York recognized the marriage. But because the marriage was not recognized by the U.S. government, Windsor paid a federal estate tax bill of more than $360,000 that would not have been assessed if she were married to a man.
The Obama administration agreed with the appeals court that ordered a refund but wanted the Supreme Court to render a definitive verdict on DOMA.

미국 대법원, '결혼은 이성간 결합' 위헌 결정(2보)

캘리포니아주 동성결혼 허용연합뉴스 | 입력 2013.06.26 23:53 | 수정 2013.06.27 00:28    
 

 

캘리포니아주 동성결혼 허용

(워싱턴=연합뉴스) 이승관 특파원 = 미국 연방 대법원은 26일(현지시간) 결혼을 이성간 결합으로 규정한 연방 결혼보호법(DOMA)에 대해 위헌 결정을 내렸다.

이로써 동성결혼 커플에 대해 이성 결혼 부부와 달리 세금, 보건, 주택 관련 혜택을 주지 않는 연방법 조항은 개정이 불가피하게 됐다.

앤서니 케네디 대법관은 이날 다수 의견문에서 "연방 결혼보호법은 동성 부부가 삶을 영위하는 데 부담을 안기고 있다"면서 "이는 수정헌법 5조에서 보호하고 있는 개인의 동등한 자유를 빼앗는 것"이라고 밝혔다.

이날 위헌 심리에서 대법관 5명은 위헌, 4명은 합헌 의견을 각각 밝힌 것으로 알려졌다.

대법원은 또 이날 동성결혼을 금지한 캘리포니아주(州)의 법률 조항과 관련, 동성결혼을 허용해야 한다는 취지로 결정했다.

그러나 미국의 모든 주가 동성결혼을 허용해야 하는지의 여부에 대해서는 결론을 유보했다.

미국에서는 현재 특별자치구인 워싱턴DC를 비롯해 워싱턴주, 아이오와주, 미네소타주, 델라웨어주, 메릴랜드주, 코네티컷주, 메인주, 매사추세츠주, 뉴햄프셔주, 뉴욕주, 로드아일랜드주, 버몬트주 등에서 동성 결혼을 허용하고 있다.

humane@yna.co.kr

(끝)

< 저작권자(c)연합뉴스. 무단전재-재배포금지. >