DOMA case gets its day in court Healey, chief of the Massachusetts Attorney General office's Bureau of Public Protection and Advocacy, was one of the attorneys arguing against the Defense of Marriage Act Wednesday. (-: Courtesy Massachusetts Attorney General's
Hot ladies looking casual sex Tifton office) A judge panel in Boston heard oral arguments Wednesday in the first challenge to the Defense of Marriage Act to reach a federal appeals court. And the challenges to counsel representing the Republican leadership of the. House, which is defending the statute, came fast and furious, particularly from the panel's one minority member. Isn't DOMA "forcing states to change their marriage laws to comply?" asked Judge Torruella of, the counsel hired by the Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group, headed by House Speaker Boehner (R-Ohio). And if states don't comply, asked Torruella, don't they lose all sorts of benefits downstream? What if DOMA said the federal government would not recognize marriages between different races, said Torruella. And could really argue that a 1st Circuit ruling in a case concerning the "don't Ask, don't Tell" law – that it could be justified on a simple rational basis alone – be considered binding in this case, given the "different standards" for courts reviewing military matters? Judge Boudin pressed to explain Congress' reasons for passing DOMA. When responded that Congress sought to "preserve" prior legislative understandings of what marriage means, Boudin pushed back, asking him, "What, beyond the status quo?" Chief Judge Lynch asked to "expand" on his argument that Congress passed DOMA to provide for a "waiting period" to how the same-sex marriage issue would play out in the states. Full Story: