clipped from metroweekly.com Federal Court Rules DOMA Violates Equal Protection Posted by Chris Geidner on July 8, 2010 4:35 PM | Permalink U.S. District Court Judge Jospeh Tauro, appointed to the federal bench in 1972, ruled this afternoon in Gill v. Office of Personnel Management that Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act violates the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, according to a tweet sent from Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders, which brought the case. A companion decision in Massachusetts v. U.S. Dep't of Health and Human Services also was issued, according to a GLAD news advisort Section 3 of DOMA defines "marriage" and "spouse" at the federal level as constituting only opposite-sex couples. It reads: `In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the word `marriage' means only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife, and the word `spouse' refers only to a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife.'. The Gill case, which was filed first, is unique because it challenged not the right of same-sex couples to marry, but the discrimination faced by same-sex couples who were legally married in Massachusetts but are treated differently than opposite-sex married couples by the federal government. The case points to health and retirement benefits of federal employees and their same-sex spouses or, in one case, the widow of a former federal employee. It also challenges diffential tax treatment faced by same-sex couples. The Massachusetts challenge adresses specific problems faced by the state of Massachusetts because of the federal prohibition on recognition of the same-sex marriages legally entered into in the state. More will be forthcoming ...