.
Feedback

Connecticut Joins States in Same-Sex Marriage Support

Connecticut and two other states say that the federal "Defense of Marriage Act" is unconstitutional. And the three have jointly filed a friends of the court brief in a case pending in federal court of appeals.

The attorney generals of Connecticut, New York and Vermont have jointly asked a federal appeals court to declare the unconstitutionality of a federal law that refuses recognition for same-sex marriages. 

The federal statute, called the Defense of Marriage Act, or DOMA, defines marriage for all federal purposes as “only a legal union between one man and one woman.”

Because of DOMA, married same-sex couples in Vermont and other states are not eligible for a wide range of federal benefits and are treated as unmarried for federal tax purposes.

“These married couples – our friends and neighbors in Vermont – have every right to fair and equal treatment by the federal government,” said Vermont Attorney General William Sorrell. “Instead, they are denied Social Security benefits, tax exemptions, and health and retirement benefits. I am pleased to have worked with New York and Connecticut on this brief urging the Second Circuit to end this discriminatory practice.”

The joint filing by the three states is a “friend of the court” brief in a case pending in the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in New York City. The brief emphasizes that states, not the federal government, regulate marriage and family relationships, and argues that Congress does not have authority to refuse recognition for same-sex marriages allowed under state law.

The case is Windsor v. United States, No. 12-2335, pending in the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. A Congressional group called the Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group, or BLAG, is defending DOMA. The U.S. Department of Justice has taken the position that the challenged provision of DOMA is unconstitutional.

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from East Haven Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Loading comments ...
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Sam Giglio May 18, 2013 at 04:41 pm
Jack is a good and decent man, He would be an asset to this Town if Elected to serve as our Mayor.Read More With that said we look forward to a new beginning in East Haven, One that can set the path to a new vision for the Residents who live here now and the ones yet to come. Yes its easy to say I like Jack
Richard Poulton May 18, 2013 at 03:53 pm
Gene, Jack is your party's pick, so what else are you to say. As to Jack, if he is anything likeRead More his father he IS a good man. But being just a good man doesn't cut it in todays small world politics. Jack has issues he needs to explain and I am sure when he time comes he will. But as to this article, I wouldn't expect anything else from the SHADOW. Wouldn't want him backing me for anything.
Gene Ruocco May 18, 2013 at 10:40 am
Very positive reasons for supporting Jack Stacey For Mayor of East Haven.
Gene Ruocco May 18, 2013 at 04:24 pm
Richard, the Mayor kicked the CEO of the company that had the contract out of his office less than aRead More month after he won the election. The contract was with the town not the BOE. And if you think the only thing to check is if the panels are dirty, then it isn't worth answering you. A large investment of tax dollars was made and it is paying off with lower electric bills. The systems delivering these savings need to be checked, that is why people who were smart enough to sign a maintenance agreement did just that. Ask the BOE how the chiller replacement is going at the High School; due to lack of maintenance they lost two chillers that should have lasted at least 10 to 15 more years. Penny wise and dollar foolish is what this is all about, not the election year, but what else could we expect from you Richard. You have become the cheer leader of the administration.
Richard Poulton May 18, 2013 at 03:58 pm
Boy, you just know it's an election year. Gene, one question, when was this contract stopped?Read More Just now or some time ago, but seeing its getting "close' to November you just thought you would bring this up. Besides, shouldn't your question be aimed at the B of E, not the Mayor. And what is to be maintained anyway beside washing the panals now and then? You just keep us all informed now Gene.
Anne Santello May 16, 2013 at 06:31 pm
Thanks Richard. Allison...I know that street is crazy!! I was just saying that the van makes theRead More stop sign so hard to see. I wish they would put a cop there too. Unfortunately, things don't get attention until something bad happens.
AllisonWonderland Beckert May 16, 2013 at 05:58 pm
Please, a parked Van you are worrying about???? Every Morning in that same area of Chidsey,Read More Thompson, Prospect. etc, Cars, Trucks etc. Blast thru the Stop Signs and continue on their merry way. I'd worry about the kids walking to the bus stops and school being run down by these careless drivers... EVERY DAY I SEE IT !!!! I wish the Police Department would put an unmarked car in the area.. The Town of East Haven would be rich from ALL the Fines !!!!!
Richard Poulton May 16, 2013 at 05:47 pm
Anne, go to town clerks office and get a copy of Town Codes, Article ll, Section 12-16 and 12-17.Read More Section 12-17 defines an abandoned M/V as any M/V which is "inoperatable", or unregistered and is left in one location for a continuous period of more than 24 hours. Then call the Chiefs office and hit him with that. If nothing happens go to next Town Council meeting and during general public comments ask WHY nothing is done when complaint is made. Good luck.
CitizenVoice May 15, 2013 at 03:06 am
"Nature will reclaim what we took from it in past years." I guess there is one thing weRead More agree on. And it started to sound good until the "government will make me whole, no matter what...." Political trip-wire. I have always felt no one should be allowed to claim or build on shoreline land within a mile of the water, with the exception of ports, on either coast. If it all were National Park lands... if only that decision was made way back when the land was pure and clean... the present and future wouldn't be as nightmarish as it inevitably will be. Only 50 years ago, when I was a very small child, I remember chasing all kinds of sea creatures (crabs, sea horses, star fish) around Silver Sands beach while my Dad caught a bushel of flounder. Where are they now? Yup, I'm a "Tree-Hugger" and, as outrageous as such a plan would be, I would throw all my energy behind a plan to de-populate the shoreline.
Richard Poulton May 14, 2013 at 07:10 pm
In the neigborhood of 135 words and you said what? Nature will reclaim what we took from it inRead More past years. Storms will happen, gee thats news, build a home on the shore line and it maybe lost due to a storm, power will be lost for awhile, OH my God. Far too much traffic, what are we to do? Update a plan for what purpose, the government will make me whole no matter what I do or what circumstance I put myself into. Give me a break! Like the old saying goes. **** happens, deal with it.