United States First Circuit

Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) is ruled unconstitutional as a violation of equal protection, where: 1) intermediate scrutiny was not appropriate, but in areas where state regulation has traditionally governed, the court may require that the federal government interest in intervention be shown with special clarity; 2) the statute's consequences did not violate the Tenth Amendment or Spending Clause, but given that DOMA intrudes broadly into an area of traditional state regulation, a closer examination of the justifications that would prevent DOMA from violating equal protection is uniquely reinforced by federalism concerns; and 3) the rationales offered in support of section 3 of DOMA did not provide adequate support for it.

Appellate Information

• Decided 05/31/2012
• Published 05/31/2012

Judges

• Boudin

Court

• United States First Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Paul D. Clement, Mary L. Bonauto