Edith Windsor: Case Study
Slow Moving For Equality Even After DOMA Ruling
Edith Windsor the woman who made history on June 26th, 2013 fought the Supreme Court claiming that Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) was unconstitutional. Edith and her partner Thea Spyer were together for 40 years and married in 2007. After her partner died in 2009, she could not receive the same benefits that a opposite sex couple could and was told to pay $363,000 in estate taxes. With DOMA, Edith was not considered a spouse by the federal government and this made her ineligible to receive the tax benefits of a married couple. The federal tax code recognizes that it is unfair to tax spouses when property is received upon death. Also some states have a benefit that exempts Property Tax upon a spouse 's death. Which in a heterosexual marriage if a spouse passes the property is just passed along as without paying estate taxes. Edith spent an estimated $600,000 to pay the state and federal taxes to receive her partners’ home. This injustice made her fight for her rights which brought the case of the United States v. Windsor. Her courage has opened new doors for same sex partners.
Recently, there has been progress in the Lesbian Gay Bisexual …show more content…
According to the 104th Congress US Government Printing Office Section 1 is the short title which states: “This Act may be cited as the "Defense of Marriage Act".” Section 2 is about the powers reserved to the states. To sum up this section it states that “No State ... shall be required to give effect to any public act, record, or judicial proceeding of any other State ... between persons of the same sex that is treated as a marriage under the laws of such other State ... or claim arising from such relationship.” In other words one State doesn’t have to recognize the other States marital laws when it comes to same-sex couples. Now Section 3 is what the Supreme Court struck
Edith Windsor the woman who made history on June 26th, 2013 fought the Supreme Court claiming that Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) was unconstitutional. Edith and her partner Thea Spyer were together for 40 years and married in 2007. After her partner died in 2009, she could not receive the same benefits that a opposite sex couple could and was told to pay $363,000 in estate taxes. With DOMA, Edith was not considered a spouse by the federal government and this made her ineligible to receive the tax benefits of a married couple. The federal tax code recognizes that it is unfair to tax spouses when property is received upon death. Also some states have a benefit that exempts Property Tax upon a spouse 's death. Which in a heterosexual marriage if a spouse passes the property is just passed along as without paying estate taxes. Edith spent an estimated $600,000 to pay the state and federal taxes to receive her partners’ home. This injustice made her fight for her rights which brought the case of the United States v. Windsor. Her courage has opened new doors for same sex partners.
Recently, there has been progress in the Lesbian Gay Bisexual …show more content…
According to the 104th Congress US Government Printing Office Section 1 is the short title which states: “This Act may be cited as the "Defense of Marriage Act".” Section 2 is about the powers reserved to the states. To sum up this section it states that “No State ... shall be required to give effect to any public act, record, or judicial proceeding of any other State ... between persons of the same sex that is treated as a marriage under the laws of such other State ... or claim arising from such relationship.” In other words one State doesn’t have to recognize the other States marital laws when it comes to same-sex couples. Now Section 3 is what the Supreme Court struck