Insurance Claims Adjuster, Claims News, LEGAL/JUDGEMENTS, Supreme Court Asked to Review Edie Windsor’s Challenge to “Defense of Marriage Act” Claims-Portal.com

Become a member and contribute content to Claims-Portal.com Add your company to the Claims-Portal.com Vendor Directory Add job openings to the Claims-Portal.com Career Center
Claims-Portal.comClaims News
My Claims-Portal
Oct 23, 2017    
 - Member Benefits
 - Become a Member
 - About Us
 - Advertising

this page!
Independent Adjusters
Employers/Recruiters
Dyanclaim for Claims Websites

Browse Categories
Claims News Sections
  INSURANCE/CLAIMS
  LEGAL/JUDGEMENTS
  WEATHER/CATS
Announcements
  Association Announcements
  Business Announcements
  NAIIA Member Announcements
  Other Categories
 
C2Track Claims Management System

News » LEGAL/JUDGEMENTS News

Print Story

Supreme Court Asked to Review Edie Windsor’s Challenge to “Defense of Marriage Act”

advertisement
Dyanclaim for Claims Websites

WASHINGTON--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Edith “Edie” Windsor, who sued the government for failing to recognize her marriage to her late spouse, Thea Spyer, asked the U.S. Supreme Court today to hear her challenge to the so-called “Defense of Marriage Act” (DOMA).

The petition for certiorari to the Supreme Court was filed on Ms. Windsor’s behalf by her attorneys at Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP, the American Civil Liberties Union, the New York Civil Liberties Union and the Stanford Law School Supreme Court Litigation Clinic.

In June, a federal district judge in New York ruled in Ms. Windsor’s favor that section three of DOMA unconstitutionally discriminates against married same-sex couples. The Justice Department and the leadership of the House of Representatives recently asked the Supreme Court to hear DOMA challenges in two other cases, including a case, like Ms. Windsor’s, that is still pending in a federal appeals court.

“With Edie’s case and the two others, the high court has before it striking illustrations of the many different harms that DOMA inflicts on many thousands of married same-sex couples all across the country,” said James Esseks, Director of the ACLU Lesbian Gay Bisexual and Transgender Project. “Edie and Thea got married after making a life-long commitment to each other, and it’s just wrong for the government to pretend that they were legal strangers.”

Windsor and Spyer lived together for more than four decades in Greenwich Village. Despite not being able to marry legally, they were engaged in 1967. In 1977, Spyer was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis, and Ms. Windsor helped her through her long battle with that disease. They were finally legally married in May 2007.

When Spyer died in 2009, she left all of her property to Ms. Windsor. Because they were married, Spyer's estate normally would have passed to Edie as her spouse without any estate tax at all. But because of DOMA, Ms. Windsor had to pay more than $363,000 in federal estate taxes. Payment of the federal estate tax by a surviving spouse is one of the most significant adverse impacts of DOMA since the amount owed, as was true in this case, is often quite substantial.

“Edie Windsor, who recently celebrated her 83rd birthday, suffers from a serious heart condition,” said Roberta Kaplan, a partner at Paul Weiss and counsel to Ms. Windsor. “Because the District Court’s ruling in her favor is entitled to an automatic stay of enforcement, Edie cannot yet receive a refund of the unconstitutional estate tax that she was forced to pay simply for being gay. The constitutional injury inflicted on Edie should be remedied within her lifetime.”

“The impact of DOMA is felt most dramatically today here in New York,” said NYCLU Executive Director Donna Lieberman. “At least 10,000 same-sex couples have been married in New York since our marriage law went into effect. But DOMA subjects gay and lesbian married New Yorkers to a form of second-class citizenship. All married couples should have their marriages respected by the federal government, once and for all.”

In the meantime, Ms. Windsor will continue to defend her victory before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, which has agreed to hear her case on an expedited basis.

Print Story
Send This Story To Someone
Your Email:
Their Email:
  Comments:
 

Claims News Home Page   |   RSS Feeds
Announcements   |   Member Blogs   |   Newsletters   |   Letters
Submit A News Story   |   Contact The Editor

  •  Announcements
  •  Claims Events
  •  Insurance News
  •  Special Offers
  •  Newsletters
  •  Blogs
  •  RSS Feeds
  •  Directory
  •  insURLinks
  •  Classifieds
  •  About Us
  •  Contact Us
  •  Advertising
  •  Member Search

  •  Registration
  •  Login
  •  E-Mail Lists
  • Home  |   Privacy Policy  |   Terms of Service  |   Site Map
    © 1998-2017 E-Claim.com, LLC