Employee Benefits Issues in California Following the U.S. Supreme Court's Same-Sex Marriage Decisions
Polsinelli Podcast - Defense of Marriage Act
Supreme Court’s Rulings On Same-Sex Marriage Spark Many Questions On Employee Benefits
Viewer's Guide to Gay Marriage Oral Arguments
Across the country each June, communities come together to celebrate Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Queer (LGBTQ) Pride Month. This month of events honors the 1969 Stonewall Uprising in Manhattan while also...more
Here’s the next chapter in the saga known as Edith Schlain Windsor v. The United States of America. (For a quick recap, please read Tax & Estate Planning – Small Win for Same Sex Couples?). Two representatives of the state...more
On October 21, 2015, the IRS issued proposed regulations to clarify the treatment of same-sex spouses for federal tax purposes. By way of background, in 2013, the United States Supreme Court held in United States v. Windsor...more
The Impact of National Same-Sex Marriage for Employers - Why it matters: How will employers feel the impact of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Obergefell v. Hodges? The landmark ruling that the Fourteenth...more
The United States Supreme Court issued its opinion in Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U.S. ___ (2015) on June 26, 2015. In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court held that the Fourteenth Amendment requires a State to license a marriage...more
On Monday, the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit invalidated Virginia’s prohibition on same-sex marriages. Bostic v. Schaefer, Docket No. 14-1167 (4th Cir. July 28, 2014). The Fourth Circuit includes Virginia, Maryland,...more
As a result of two Federal trial court decisions issued May 19, 2014 and May 20, 2014, Oregon and Pennsylvania became the 18th and 19th states where gay and lesbian couples can legally marry. In these decisions, U.S....more
Today, a U.S. District Court in Pennsylvania nullified Pennsylvania’s Marriage Laws, holding that they violate the due process and equal protection clauses of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. If the ruling stands...more
On June 26, 2013, the United States Supreme Court held that Section 3 the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which prevented the federal government from recognizing state-granted same-sex marriages, was unconstitutional because...more
As we previously reported, the decision overturning the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) left open many questions, including the impact of the decision on states that do not recognize same-sex marriage. Recent decisions...more
On June 26, 2013, in a 5-4 vote the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the 1993 Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) was unconstitutional as a violation of Fifth Amendment guarantees of equal protection and equal liberty....more
Health Care Reform Employer Mandate and Reporting Provisions Delayed until 2015 - The U.S. Department of the Treasury unexpectedly announced on July 2, 2013 the delay of the employer shared responsibility ‘pay or play’...more
The US Supreme Court has ruled that Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which defined marriage for federal law purposes to mean opposite-sex marriage, is unconstitutional (United States v. Windsor, 2013 WL...more
In the recently-issued opinion in United States v. Windsor, the Supreme Court has ruled that Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) is unconstitutional as a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the...more
On June 26, 2013, in United States v. Windsor, the United States Supreme Court struck down Section 3 of DOMA, holding that it was unconstitutional to discriminate between same-sex and opposite-sex marriages for purposes of...more
On June 26, 2013, the United States Supreme Court held in United States v. Windsor, that Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (“DOMA”) was “unconstitutional as a deprivation of the equal liberty of persons that is...more
On June 26, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a decision that will affect virtually all employers across the country. In United States v. Windsor, the Court ruled in a 5-4 decision that Section 3 of the federal Defense of...more
The regulation of marriage was historically presumed to be the exclusive domain of the states. Since 1996, however, the Defense of Marriage Act of 1996 (“DOMA”) changed this presumption in two important respects...more
Statement from Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano: “After last week’s decision by the Supreme Court holding that Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) is unconstitutional, President Obama directed...more
Two controversial cases involving same-sex marriage were decided on June 26, 2013 by the United States Supreme Court. ...more
Last week, the Supreme Court of the United States struck down as unconstitutional a key provision of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) that defined “marriage” for purposes of over 1,100 federal laws as a legal union between...more
Signed into law in 1996, the Defense of Marriage Act, known as DOMA, defined “marriage” for purposes of federal law as a union between one man and one woman as husband and wife, and “spouse” as a person of the opposite sex....more
The Supreme Court’s ruling that the Defense of Marriage Act’s definition of marriage as a legal union only between one man and one woman is unconstitutional requires employers to treat same-sex couples who are legally married...more
On June 26, the US Supreme Court ruled in United States v. Windsor that Section 3 of the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) is unconstitutional. The Supreme Court ruled that DOMA’s federal exclusion of state-recognized...more
Although the decision of the United States Supreme Court in United States v. Windsor invalidating much of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) affects at most approximately 20% of the population of the United States, it has...more