Senate panel approves DOMA repeal legislation

[The Philosopher]

from the Washington Blade

A Senate committee took historic action on Thursday against the Defense of Marriage Act by approving legislation that would lift the anti-gay law from the books.

The Senate Judiciary Committee reported the legislation to the floor by a vote of 10-8 along a party-line basis.

The committee vote marks the first-time ever that any component of Congress has voted to repeal DOMA, which prohibits federal recognition of same-sex marriage, since it was first enacted in 1996.

Committee Chair Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) in his opening statement said legislation to repeal DOMA, which is known as the Respect for Marriage Act, is necessary because “thousands of American families are now being treated unfairly by their federal government.”

“They are shunted aside — singled out from all other marriages recognized by their states,” Leahy said. “This unfairness must end. The Respect for Marriage Act would provide for the equal treatment of all lawful treatment of all lawful marriages in this country by repealing DOMA.”

...

Republicans said they oppose DOMA repeal because they believe it would undermine the definition of marriage as one man, one woman and impose same-sex marriage in states where it isn’t recognized. The GOP committee members also questioned why the panel was taking up the bill when passage of the floor is unlikely and the country is facing other matters such as jobs and the economy.

The Respect for Marriage Act wouldn’t require states to recognize marriage equality. However, the bill would enable federal benefits to continue to flow to same-sex couples if they marry in one jurisdiction and move to another state within the country that doesn’t recognize their union.

http://www.washingtonblade.com/2011/11/10/breaking-senate-panel-approves-doma-repeal-legislation/">Click Here To Read More

[struggle4progress]

1. Here's the S. 598 text from GPO via Thomas:

A BILL
To repeal the Defense of Marriage Act and ensure respect
for State regulation of marriage.
1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa
2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Respect for Marriage
5 Act of 2011’’.

1 SEC. 2. REPEAL OF SECTION ADDED TO TITLE 28, UNITED
2 STATES CODE, BY SECTION 2 OF THE DE3
FENSE OF MARRIAGE ACT.
4 Section 1738C of title 28, United States Code, is re
5 pealed, and the table of sections at the beginning of chap
6 ter 115 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by
7 striking the item relating to that section.
8 SEC. 3. MARRIAGE RECOGNITION.
9 Section 7 of title 1, United States Code, is amended
10 to read as follows:
11 ‘‘§ 7. Marriage
12 ‘‘(a) For the purposes of any Federal law in which
13 marital status is a factor, an individual shall be considered
14 married if that individual’s marriage is valid in the State
15 where the marriage was entered into or, in the case of
16 a marriage entered into outside any State, if the marriage
17 is valid in the place where entered into and the marriage
18 could have been entered into in a State.
19 ‘‘(b) In this section, the term ‘State’ means a State,
20 the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto
21 Rico, or any other territory or possession of the United
22 States.’’.


According to Thomas, Latest Major Action is:
11/10/2011 Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 228.
http://thomas.loc.gov/home/thomas.php


It doesn't appear on the 10 November calendar (which only lists 227 items), but it does appear as #228 on today's (14 November) calendar:

228
S. 598 Mrs. Feinstein and others
A bill to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act and ensure respect for State regulation of marriage.
Nov. 10, 2011.--Mr. Leahy, Committee on the Judiciary, without amendment. (No written report.)
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/browse/collection.action?collectionCode=CCAL&browsePath=112%2FSCAL&isCollapsed=false&leafLevelBrowse=false&ycord=0

[Occulus]

2. Does this invalidate the parts of State Amendments

that allow the State to refuse to recognize those marriages considered valid in another State?

I'm thinking Michigan and others that refuse to recognize gay marriages performed in other states as valid. How does the language of the DOMA repeal address the apparent conflict? Or isn't there any conflict?

[struggle4progress]

3. I'm not a lawyer. But my reading is: the bill, if passed, would bring marriage under the full faith

and credit clause of the Constitution (Art IV Sec I) -- Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state

The legislative record, so far, as I read it, indicates the bill, that Feinstein introduced in March, was sent to the Judiciary Committee, which held hearings in July and reported the bill favorably back to the Senate last week unamended (without a written report)

So I expect the text at Thomas is current: an individual shall be considered married if that individual’s marriage is valid in the State where the marriage was entered into or, in the case of a marriage entered into outside any State, if the marriage is valid in the place where entered into and the marriage could have been entered into in a State

On my reading of that language, a marriage would recognized under US law, if either (1) the couple's actual marriage occurred legally in some US state, or (2) the couple's actual marriage could have occurred legally in some US state, even though the actual marriage did not occur in any US state

I think that means that a couple who got legally married in New York would necessarily be regarded as legally married in Texas and that a couple who got legally married in the Netherlands would necessarily be regarded as legally married in Texas if they could have gotten legally married in New York (even though they actually got married somewhere else) -- but, again, I'm not a lawyer

I have no idea what amendments might appear on the Senate floor

[Evasporque]

4. never will pass house....and be fillibustered by GOP and DINOs will vote with them...

Nice that it was brought up...and good it will be another thing the Republicans can be slammed for...but the modern crop of GOP and and conservative DINOS...will have to be voted out of office with a Dem in oval office... before such a measure will pass the house. Until then the Gay Marriage political football will continue to be used for vote haggling...