Trial by Jury: Why It Matters in a Democratic Society
Waldman: Stop Immunizing Websites That Allow Harassment
Busy Days For Voting Rights Advocates, Thanks to SCOTUS
A Moment of Simple Justice - Snitching Ain't Easy
Fighting for Education Rights: Equal Justice for Pregnant and Parenting Students
Combining Arms for Justice-Involved Veterans
A Moment of Simple Justice - Cameras on Cops
A Moment of Simple Justice - Ferguson
A Moment of Simple Justice - Revenge Porn
Schoenbrod: SCOTUS Ruling Helps EPA Deal With a "Stupid Statute"
SOX Whistleblower Protections Extend to Private Companies: Critical Steps to Take Now
A More Perfect Union: Why Punish Russia for Crimea?
Jail Time for Revenge Porn Offenses?
End Game in the Fight Over Same Sex Marriage?
Is Punishment Dead in America?
Bill on Bankruptcy: Detroit Falls Short on Good-Faith Test
Bill on Bankruptcy: Madoff Victims Rooting for Stanford Victory
Bill on Bankruptcy: Listening in the Dark at the NCBJ
Health Care Antitrust & the Supreme Court – Interview with Bruce Sokler, Member, Mintz Levin
Bill on Bankruptcy: Detroit Shows Need for Amending Bankruptcy Law
On May 20, 2014, in the case of Whitewood v. Wolf, Judge John E. Jones III of the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania struck down Pennsylvania’s ban on same-sex marriages. Like many of the rulings...more
Ruling creates planning opportunities to minimize income taxes.
In Linn v. Department of Revenue, the Illinois Fourth District Appellate Court reviewed the state’s statutory framework for taxing trusts. Linn v....more
In a four to three decision, the en banc Commonwealth Court held that a senior citizen’s estate was entitled to a rebate under the Senior Citizens Property Tax and Rent Rebate Assistance Act, 53 P.S. §§ 6926.1301-6926.1313...more
Same-sex marriages now are being recognized under federal tax law for the first time. In June 2013, the Supreme Court released its decision in United States v. Windsor, 530 U.S. 12 (2013), declaring Section 3 of the federal...more
What you need to know:
As the result of the Supreme Court’s recent decision in United States v. Windsor and a subsequent ruling by the IRS, same-sex couples who are legally married in a jurisdiction that recognizes...more
This is a brief update on recent Pennsylvania tax developments. It is intended to provide an overview of issues and cases to watch, as well as administrative and legislative developments.
Recently, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled unconstitutional Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which, for federal purposes, defined marriage as between one man and one woman. United States v. Windsor, 570 U.S. ____...more
The September §7520 rate for use with estate planning techniques such as CRTs, CLTs, QPRTs and GRATs is 2.0%, which is the same as the August rate and an increase from July's rate of 1.2%. The applicable federal rate ("AFR")...more
A new federal policy will allow legally married same-sex couples to get the same federal tax benefits as married heterosexual couples. The policy applies even if the same-sex couple lives in a state that does not recognize...more
Revenue Ruling 2013-17 -
On August 29, 2013, the US Department of the Treasury (“Treasury”) and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) issued Revenue Ruling 2013-17 (the “Ruling”) holding that, for purposes of...more
The Supreme Court’s recent Windsor decision, overturning a section of the Defense of Marriage Act, may allow significant tax savings for certain married same-sex couples. In light of the decision, married same-sex couples,...more
See how the Supreme Court’s June 26, 2013 United States v. Windsor decision, which concluded the Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutionally restricted spousal benefits to members of the opposite sex, affects ERISA beneficiary...more
The U. S. Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Windsor, 570 U.S. ___ (2013) implicates important changes to the interpretation and administration of federal tax laws (including, income, gift and estate taxes). On June...more
Rhode Island, Same Sex Divorce and Portability: Imperfect Together
by James F. McDonough, Jr. on August 13, 2013
Rhode Island Governor Chafee issued an executive order directing the state to recognize same-sex marriages...more
We recently sent an E-Alert on what the recent Supreme Court same-sex marriage decisions mean for employers, but what do those decisions mean for the couples themselves in terms of employer and tax benefits?...more
The Fatherless Child: The Law Struggles to
Catch Up to Reproductive Technology
by James F. McDonough, Jr. on August 6, 2013
The Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit filed a decision in Capato v. Commissioner
The Supreme Court of the United States recently held that the federal government must recognize same-sex marriages that are valid under state law, and effectively reinstated same-sex marriage in the state of California. ...more
The Supreme Court’s decision in Windsor v. U.S. has effectively struck down Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act, also known as DOMA, retroactively. Here are some tax advantages now available to married same-sex...more
The Supreme Court issued decisions in two landmark cases involving same-sex marriage on June 26, 2013. In United States v. Windsor, the Court held Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) to be unconstitutional, which...more
With the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark ruling in United States v. Windsor on June 26, 2013, same–sex couples legally married in a state that recognizes same-sex marriage, and who reside in such a state, are now governed by...more
In the wake of the Supreme Court’s recent decision in United States v. Windsor, you may have been wondering, what are all those “federal benefits now afforded to same-sex couples” that I keep hearing about? Well, one huge...more
The following is a short checklist of issues that Massachusetts and other employers need to address as the laws relating to retirement, medical and other employee benefits have changed. The details regarding the application...more
On June 26, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court in United States v. Windsor1 overturned Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act ("DOMA"), which had defined marriage as a union between a man and a woman.2 As a result, married...more
The U.S. Supreme Court decided United States v. Windsor, No. 12 -307 on June 26 2013, holding section 3 of the Federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) unconstitutional as it applies to valid marriages between same sex couples...more
Two controversial cases involving same-sex marriage were decided on June 26, 2013 by the United States Supreme Court. ...more
Find a Constitutional Law Author »
Back to Top