.
The surviving spouse of a lesbian couple is asking the U.S.
Supreme Court to rule on her case challenging a federal law that defines
“marriage” as a union between a man and a woman. If she wins, the
woman, Edith Windsor, will receive a refund of more than $363,000 in
estate taxes she was forced to pay because the federal government did
not consider her married to her spouse.
As ElderLawAnswers reported,
a federal district court judge ruled in June that the Defense of
Marriage Act's (DOMA's) denial of equal benefits to same-sex couples
violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fifth Amendment, and the
judge awarded Ms. Windsor reimbursement for the tax bill she paid on her
wife's estate. (Heterosexual spouses can leave any amount of property
to their spouses free of federal estate tax.)
A congressional legal group authorized by Republicans to defend
DOMA quickly filed an appeal of the district court’s ruling with the
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. Ms. Windsor’s lawyers are
hoping to speed up the case by jumping to the Supreme Court, which has
been asked to hear two other cases challenging the
statute. “The Court will likely decide the constitutionality of DOMA
this coming term, using one or more of these cases as vehicles for
addressing the issue,” according to a blog post by the American Civil Liberties Union, which is helping to represent Ms. Windsor.
"Edie Windsor, who recently celebrated her 83rd birthday,
suffers from a serious heart condition," said Roberta Kaplan, a partner
at the firm of Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP
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."
In the meantime, Ms. Windsor will continue to defend her
victory before the Second Circuit, which has agreed to hear her case on
an expedited basis, with oral argument scheduled for September.
Background of the Case
Edith Windsor and Thea Spyer became engaged in 1967 and were married in Canada in
2007, although they lived in New York City. When Ms. Spyer died in
2009, Ms. Windsor had to pay Ms Spyer's estate tax bill because of DOMA,
a 1996 law that denies federal recognition of gay marriages.
Although New York State considered the couple married, the
federal government did not and taxed Ms. Syper's estate as though the
two were not married. Ms. Windsor sued the U.S. government seeking to
have DOMA declared unconstitutional and asking for a refund of the more
than $363,000 federal estate tax she was forced to pay.
On June 6, 2012, federal court judge Barbara Jones from the
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York ruled that
there was no rational basis for DOMA's prohibition on recognizing
same-sex marriages. Jones stated that it was unclear how DOMA preserves
traditional marriage, which is one of the stated purposes of the law.
As ElderLawAnswers reported last
year, President Obama decided to stop defending DOMA, so members of
Congress formed an advisory group to defend the law. This was the fifth
case to strike down DOMA.
For more on the decision to appeal the case to the Supreme Court, click here and here.
Reprinted with the permission of ElderLawAnswers.com
Tuesday, July 31, 2012
Tuesday, July 3, 2012
Federal Court Rules That Gay Widow Is Entitled to Estate Tax Refund
.
Finding that the Defense of Marriage Act's (DOMA's) denial of equal benefits to same-sex couples violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fifth Amendment, a federal court judge has awarded the surviving spouse of a lesbian couple reimbursement for the tax bill she paid on her wife's estate.
Edith Windsor and Thea Spyer became engaged in 1967 and were married in Canada in 2007, although they lived in New York City. Ordinarily, spouses can leave any amount of property to their spouses free of federal estate tax. But when Ms. Spyer died in 2009, Ms. Windsor, now 82, had to pay Ms Spyer's estate tax bill because of DOMA, a 1996 law that denies federal recognition of gay marriages.
Although New York State considered the couple married, the federal government did not and taxed Ms. Syper's estate as though the two were not married. Ms. Windsor sued the U.S. government seeking to have DOMA declared unconstitutional and asking for a refund of the more than $350,000 in estate taxes she was forced to pay.
Federal court judge Barbara Jones from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York ruled that there was no rational basis for DOMA's prohibition on recognizing same-sex marriages. Jones stated that it was unclear how DOMA preserves traditional marriage, which is one of the stated purposes of the law. As ElderLawAnswers reported last year, President Obama decided to stop defending DOMA, so members of Congress formed an advisory group to defend the law. This is the fifth case to strike down DOMA.
To read the court’s decision, click here.
Finding that the Defense of Marriage Act's (DOMA's) denial of equal benefits to same-sex couples violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fifth Amendment, a federal court judge has awarded the surviving spouse of a lesbian couple reimbursement for the tax bill she paid on her wife's estate.
Edith Windsor and Thea Spyer became engaged in 1967 and were married in Canada in 2007, although they lived in New York City. Ordinarily, spouses can leave any amount of property to their spouses free of federal estate tax. But when Ms. Spyer died in 2009, Ms. Windsor, now 82, had to pay Ms Spyer's estate tax bill because of DOMA, a 1996 law that denies federal recognition of gay marriages.
Although New York State considered the couple married, the federal government did not and taxed Ms. Syper's estate as though the two were not married. Ms. Windsor sued the U.S. government seeking to have DOMA declared unconstitutional and asking for a refund of the more than $350,000 in estate taxes she was forced to pay.
Federal court judge Barbara Jones from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York ruled that there was no rational basis for DOMA's prohibition on recognizing same-sex marriages. Jones stated that it was unclear how DOMA preserves traditional marriage, which is one of the stated purposes of the law. As ElderLawAnswers reported last year, President Obama decided to stop defending DOMA, so members of Congress formed an advisory group to defend the law. This is the fifth case to strike down DOMA.
To read the court’s decision, click here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)