Justices to Hear Woman's DOMA Challenge

, The National Law Journal


The justices will review a decision by the Second Circuit holding unconstitutional a section of the Defense of Marriage Act that defines marriage, for federal government purposes, as exclusively a union between one man and one woman.

This content has been archived. It is available exclusively through our partner LexisNexis®.

To view this content, please continue to Lexis Advance®.

Continue to Lexis Advance®

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber? Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via Lexis Advance®. This includes content from the National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.

ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at customercare@alm.com

What's being said

  • Avon

    It would have been good to publish the actual title of the Windsor case.
    BLAG may have "stepped into the defense vacuum," but that's not the same thing as actually saying that they are the appellant who sought certiorari. If some Tea Party politician is the lead party of record against Windsor, I'd like to know who!
    And, ideally, if BLAG is the lead party of record, I'd like to see the Democrats in BLAG petition to re-name the appellant "Single-party Legal Advisory Group" (instead of "Bipartisan"), so that it could be "SLAG v. Windsor." Has a nice ring to it.

Comments are not moderated. To report offensive comments, click here.

Preparing comment abuse report for Article #1202580749043

Thank you!

This article's comments will be reviewed.