District court holds same-sex married partners qualify for joint return filing

Last month, a U.S. district court found that Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act of 1996 (DOMA) violates the equal protection provision of the Fifth Amendment's due process clause. The court found no rational basis for denying federal benefits to same-sex couples. As a result, the court ruled that the litigants were allowed to file a federal joint return rather than each filing as single.

Background

The taxpayers, a group of same-sex couples legally married in the state of Massachusetts, filed suit for the right to file their federal income taxes jointly, among access to other rights afforded to married couples under federal law. (Filing a federal joint return generally results in lower taxes than filing separately or as head of household). The taxpayers asserted that the federal government's use of DOMA to determine eligibility for federal marriage-based benefits, such as federal employee health insurance and joint tax return filing, is unconstitutional.

Court's holding

In finding that DOMA bears no rational relationship to a legitimate government objective, the court struck down Congress's asserted reasons for enacting DOMA - to encourage responsible procreation, defend traditional marriage and morality, and conserve limited resources.

The court also found that Congress has no interest in DOMA's aim: to ensure consistent distribution of federal marriage-based benefits. Further, the court determined that DOMA does not provide for nationwide consistency in the distribution of federal benefits among married couples. The states alone have the right to establish eligibility requirements as to familial relationships and the federal government cannot have a legitimate reason in disregarding those family status determinations, the court held.

Comment. The government has not yet announced its plans for an appeal or any request for a stay, nor has the IRS indicated how it would handle refund claims based on the court's decision. It also presently remains unknown as to what consequences the district court's decision may ultimately have beyond the right to file joint federal income tax returns.

Gill, DC Mass., July 8, 2010