windsor executor estate spyer et argued march decided june state new york recognizes marriage new york residents edith windsor thea spyer wed ontario canada spyer died left entire estate windsor windsor sought claim federal estate tax exemption surviving spouses barred federal defense marriage act doma amended dictionary act law providing rules construction federal laws whole realm federal regulations define marriage spouse excluding partners windsor paid estate taxes sought refund internal revenue service denied windsor brought refund suit contending doma violates principles equal protection incorporated fifth amendment suit pending attorney general notified speaker house representatives department justice longer defend constitutionality response bipartisan legal advisory group blag house representatives voted intervene litigation defend constitutionality district permitted intervention merits ruled finding unconstitutional ordering treasury refund windsor tax interest second circuit affirmed complied judgment held jurisdiction consider merits case case clearly presented concrete disagreement opposing parties suitable judicial resolution district executive decision defend constitutionality continuing deny refunds assess deficiencies introduces complication given government concession amicus contends district ordered refund case ended appeal dismissed argument elides distinction article iii jurisdictional requirements prudential limits exercise essentially matters judicial warth seldin retains stake sufficient support article iii jurisdiction appeal refund ordered pay windsor real immediate economic injury hein freedom religion foundation even executive disagrees doma windsor ongoing claim funds refuses pay thus establishes controversy sufficient article iii jurisdiction cf ins chadha prudential considerations however demand concrete adverseness sharpens presentation issues upon largely depends illumination difficult constitutional questions baker carr unlike article iii requirements must satisfied parties judicial consideration appropriate prudential factors counsel hearing case subject countervailing considerations may outweigh concerns underlying usual reluctance exert judicial power warth supra one consideration extent adversarial presentation issues ensured participation amici curiae prepared defend vigor legislative act constitutionality see chadha supra blag substantial adversarial argument constitutionality satisfies prudential concerns otherwise might counsel hearing appeal decision principal parties agree conclusion mean appropriate executive routine exercise challenge statutes instead making case congress amendment repeal case routine blag capable defense ensures prudential issues cloud merits question immediate importance federal government hundreds thousands persons pp doma unconstitutional deprivation equal liberty persons protected fifth amendment pp history tradition definition regulation marriage treated within authority realm separate congress enacted discrete statutes regulate meaning marriage order federal policy doma directive applicable federal statues whole realm federal regulations far greater reach operation also directed class persons laws new york sought protect assessing validity intervention requires discussing historical traditional extent state power authority marriage subject certain constitutional guarantees see loving virginia regulation domestic relations area long regarded virtually exclusive province sosna iowa significance state responsibilities definition regulation marriage dates nation beginning constitution adopted common understanding domestic relations husband wife parent child matters reserved ohio ex rel popovici agler marriage laws may vary state state consistent within state doma rejects precept state decision give class persons right marry conferred upon dignity status immense import federal government uses class opposite purpose impose restrictions disabilities question whether resulting injury indignity deprivation essential part liberty protected fifth amendment since new york treats alike federal law deems unlike law designed injure class state seeks protect new york actions proper exercise sovereign authority reflect community considered perspective historical roots institution marriage evolving understanding meaning equality pp seeking injure class new york seeks protect doma violates basic due process equal protection principles applicable federal government constitution guarantee equality must least mean bare congressional desire harm politically unpopular group justify disparate treatment group department agriculture moreno doma survive principles unusual deviation tradition recognizing accepting state definitions marriage operates deprive couples benefits responsibilities come federal recognition marriages strong evidence law purpose effect disapproval class recognized protected state law doma avowed purpose practical effect impose disadvantage separate status stigma upon enter marriages made lawful unquestioned authority doma history enactment text demonstrate interference equal dignity marriages conferred exercise sovereign power incidental effect federal statute essence blag arguments candid congressional purpose doma operation practice confirms purpose frustrates new york objective eliminating inequality writing inequality entire code doma principal effect identify make unequal subset marriages contrives deprive couples married laws state others rights responsibilities creating two contradictory marriage regimes within state also forces couples live married purpose state law unmarried purpose federal law thus diminishing stability predictability basic personal relations state found proper acknowledge protect pp affirmed kennedy delivered opinion ginsburg breyer sotomayor kagan joined roberts filed dissenting opinion scalia filed dissenting opinion thomas joined roberts joined part alito filed dissenting opinion thomas joined parts ii iii opinion notice opinion subject formal revision publication preliminary print reports readers requested notify reporter decisions washington typographical formal errors order corrections may made preliminary print goes press petitioner edith schlain windsor capacity executor estate thea clara spyer et al writ certiorari appeals second circuit june justice kennedy delivered opinion two women resident new york married lawful ceremony ontario canada edith windsor thea spyer returned home new york city spyer died left entire estate windsor windsor sought claim estate tax exemption surviving spouses barred however federal law defense marriage act excludes partner definition spouse term used federal statutes windsor paid taxes filed suit challenge constitutionality provision district appeals ruled portion statute unconstitutional ordered pay windsor refund granted certiorari affirms judgment windsor favor beginning consider concept marriage see baehr lewin haw state acted permit congress enacted defense marriage act doma stat doma contains two operative sections section challenged allows refuse recognize marriages performed laws see section issue amends dictionary act title code provide federal definition marriage spouse section doma provides follows determining meaning act congress ruling regulation interpretation various administrative bureaus agencies word means legal union one man one woman husband wife word refers person opposite sex husband wife definitional provision terms forbid enacting laws permitting marriages civil unions providing state benefits residents status enactment comprehensive definition marriage purposes federal statutes regulations directives covered terms however control federal laws marital spousal status addressed matter federal law see gao shah defense marriage act update prior report edith windsor thea spyer met new york city began relationship windsor spyer registered domestic partners new york city gave right couples concerned spyer health couple made trip canada marriage continued reside new york city state new york deems ontario marriage valid one see spyer died february left entire estate windsor doma denies federal recognition spouses windsor qualify marital exemption federal estate tax excludes taxation interest property passes passed decedent surviving spouse windsor paid estate taxes sought refund internal revenue service denied refund concluding doma windsor surviving spouse windsor commenced refund suit district southern district new york contended doma violates guarantee equal protection applied federal government fifth amendment tax refund suit pending attorney general notified speaker house representatives pursuant department justice longer defend constitutionality doma noting department previously defended doma challenges involving legally married couples app attorney general informed congress president concluded given number factors including documented history discrimination classifications based sexual orientation subject heightened standard scrutiny department justice submitted many letters years refusing defend laws deems unconstitutional instance federal rejected government defense statute issued judgment case unusual however letter preceded adverse judgment letter instead reflected executive conclusion relying definition still debated considered courts heightened equal protection scrutiny apply laws classify basis sexual orientation although president instructed department defend statute windsor also decided section continue enforced executive branch interest providing congress full fair opportunity participate litigation cases stated rationale procedure determination unconstitutionality coupled ongoing enforcement recogniz judiciary final arbiter constitutional claims raised response notice attorney general bipartisan legal advisory group blag house representatives voted intervene litigation defend constitutionality doma department justice oppose limited intervention blag district denied blag motion enter suit right rationale already represented department justice district however grant intervention blag interested party see fed rule civ proc merits tax refund suit district ruled held doma unconstitutional ordered treasury refund tax interest justice department blag filed notices appeal solicitor general filed petition certiorari judgment acted petition appeals second circuit affirmed district judgment applied heightened scrutiny classifications based sexual orientation department windsor urged complied judgment windsor received refund executive branch continues enforce doma granting certiorari question constitutionality doma requested argument two additional questions whether agreement windsor legal position precludes review whether blag standing appeal case parties agree jurisdiction decide case case framework appointed professor vicki jackson amicus curiae argue position lacks jurisdiction hear dispute ably discharged duties unrelated case appeals first circuit also held doma unconstitutional petition certiorari filed case pet cert bipartisan legal advisory group gill ii appropriate begin addressing whether either government blag entitled appeal appeals later seek certiorari appear parties dispute case district presented concrete disagreement opposing parties dispute suitable judicial resolution taxpayer standing challenge collection specific tax assessment unconstitutional forced pay tax causes real immediate economic injury individual taxpayer hein freedom religion foundation plurality opinion emphasis deleted windsor suffered redressable injury required pay estate taxes view exempt alleged invalidity doma decision executive defend constitutionality continuing deny refunds assess deficiencies introduce complication even though executive current position announced district entered judgment government agreement windsor position deprived district jurisdiction entertain resolve refund suit injury failure obtain refund allegedly required law concrete persisting unredressed government position agreeing windsor legal contention refusing give effect meant justiciable controversy parties despite claimant find inconsistency stance windsor government blag amicus appear agree upon point disagreement standing parties aspiring parties take appeal appeals appear parties proceedings amicus position given government concession unconstitutional district ordered refund case ended amicus argues appeals dismissed appeal amicus submits president agreed windsor legal position district issued judgment parties longer adverse standpoint prevailing party windsor accordingly amicus reasons inappropriate grant certiorari proceed rule merits seeks redress judgment entered position however elides distinction two principles jurisdictional requirements article iii prudential limits exercise see warth seldin latter essentially matters judicial kept two strands separate article iii standing enforces constitution requirement see lujan defenders wildlife prudential standing embodies limits exercise federal jurisdiction allen wright elk grove unified school dist newdow requirements article iii standing familiar first plaintiff must suffered fact invasion legally protected interest concrete particularized imminent conjectural hypothetical second must causal connection injury conduct complained injury trace able challenged action defendant th result independent action third party third must opposed merely injury favorable decision lujan supra citations omitted rules prudential standing contrast flexible rule federal appellate practice deposit guaranty nat bank roper designed protect courts decid ing abstract questions wide public significance even governmental institutions may competent address questions even though judicial intervention may unnecessary protect individual rights warth supra case retains stake sufficient support article iii jurisdiction appeal proceedings judgment question orders pay windsor refund seeks order directing treasury pay money real immediate economic injury hein indeed real immediate order directing individual pay tax executive may welcome order pay refund accompanied constitutional ruling wants eliminate injury national treasury payment made taxpayer judgment orders pay money disburse order government valid legal argument injured even executive disagrees doma results windsor liability tax windsor ongoing claim funds refuses pay thus establishes controversy sufficient article iii jurisdiction different case executive taken step paying windsor refund entitled district ruling confronted comparable case ins chadha statute terms allowed one house congress order immigration naturalization service ins deport respondent chadha executive determined statute unconstitutional ins presented executive views constitutionality house action appeals ins however continued abide statute ins brief appeals alter agency decision comply house action ordering deportation chadha ibid held ins sufficiently aggrieved appeals decision prohibiting taking action otherwise take regardless whether agency welcomed judgment necessity case controversy satisfy article iii defined requirement real meaning rule chadha deported uphold statute ins execute order deport quoting chadha ins conclusion dictum necessary predicate holding prior congress intervention adequate art iii adverseness holdings cases instructive words chadha make clear holding refusal executive provide relief sought suffices preserve justiciable dispute required article iii short even government largely agree opposing party merits controversy sufficient adverseness adequate basis jurisdiction fact government intended enforce challenged law party true party receives sought generally aggrieved judgment affording relief appeal roper supra see also camreta greene slip matter practice prudence generally declined consider cases request prevailing party even constitution allowed us rule source jurisdictional limitations art iii appropriate case appeal may permitted behest party prevailed merits long party retains stake appeal satisfying requirements art iii roper supra principles suffice show case presents justiciable controversy article iii prudential problems inherent executive unusual position require discussion executive agreement windsor legal argument raises risk instead earnest vital controversy faces friendly proceeding party beaten legislature seeks transfer courts inquiry constitutionality legislative act ashwander tva brandeis concurring quoting chicago grand trunk wellman even article iii permits exercise federal jurisdiction prudential considerations demand insist upon concrete adverseness sharpens presentation issues upon largely depends illumination difficult constitutional questions baker carr course reasons hear case issue ruling even one party reluctant prevail position unlike article iii requirements must satisfied parties judicial consideration appropriate relevant prudential factors counsel hearing case subject countervailing considerations may outweigh concerns underlying usual reluctance exert judicial power warth one consideration extent adversarial presentation issues assured participation amici curiae prepared defend vigor constitutionality legislative act respect prudential aspect standing well chadha encountered similar situation noted may prudential opposed art iii concerns sanctioning adjudication case absence participant supporting validity statute appeals properly dispelled concerns inviting accepting briefs houses congress chadha anomaly respect adopts practice entertaining arguments made amicus solicitor general confesses error respect judgment even confession effect admission act congress unconstitutional see dickerson case attorneys blag present substantial argument constitutionality doma blag sharp adversarial presentation issues satisfies prudential concerns otherwise might counsel hearing appeal decision principal parties agree hold prudential rules require dismiss case consequence appeals erred failing dismiss well extensive litigation ensue district courts districts throughout nation without precedential guidance tax refund suits also cases involving whole doma sweep involving federal statutes myriad federal regulations instance opinion appeals first circuit addressing validity doma case involving regulations department health human services likely vacated instructions dismiss ruling guidance also erased see massachusetts dept health human rights privileges hundreds thousands persons adversely affected pending case prudential concerns justiciability absent numerical prediction may certain certain cost judicial resources expense litigation persons adversely affected immense true extent doma mandate means point case likely arise without prudential concerns raised costs uncertainties alleged harm injuries likely continue time measured years issue resolved unusual urgent circumstances term prudential counsels proper exercise responsibility take jurisdiction reasons prudential article iii requirements met consequence need decide whether blag standing challenge district ruling affirmance appeals blag authority conclusion petition may heard merits imply difficulties ensue common practice ordinary cases executive failure defend constitutionality act congress based constitutional theory yet established judicial decisions created procedural dilemma one hand noted government agreement windsor raises questions propriety entertaining suit seeks affirmance order invalidating federal law ordering pay money hand executive agreement plaintiff law unconstitutional enough preclude judicial review primary role determining constitutionality law inflicted real injury plaintiff brought justiciable legal claim become secondary president undermine clear dictate principle act congress alleged conflict constitution emphatically province duty judicial department say law zivotofsky clinton slip quoting marbury madison cranch similarly respect legislative power congress passed statute president signed poses grave challenges separation powers executive particular moment able nullify congress enactment solely initiative without determination jurisdictional holding must underscored mean arguments dismissing dispute prudential grounds lack substance yet difficulty executive faces acknowledged executive makes principled determination statute unconstitutional faces difficult choice still suggestion appropriate executive matter course challenge statutes judicial forum rather making case congress amendment repeal integrity political process risk difficult constitutional issues simply referred routine exercise case routine capable defense law blag ensures prudential issues cloud merits question one immediate importance federal government hundreds thousands persons circumstances support decision proceed merits iii first windsor spyer longed marry neither new york state granted right waiting years traveled ontario married seems fair conclude recent years many citizens even considered possibility two persons sex might aspire occupy status dignity man woman lawful marriage marriage man woman doubt thought people essential definition term role function throughout history civilization belief many long held became even urgent cherished challenged others however came beginnings new perspective new insight accordingly concluded marriage given recognition validity law couples wish define commitment limitation lawful marriage heterosexual couples centuries deemed necessary fundamental came seen new york certain unjust exclusion slowly first rapid course laws new york came acknowledge urgency issue couples wanted affirm commitment one another children family friends community new york recognized marriages performed elsewhere later amended marriage laws permit marriage new york common writing district columbia decided couples right marry live pride union status equality married persons statewide deliberative process enabled citizens discuss weigh arguments samesex marriage new york acted enlarge definition marriage correct citizens elected representatives perceived injustice earlier known understood see marriage equality act laws codified dom rel law ann west background lawful marriage design purpose effect doma considered beginning point deciding whether valid constitution history tradition definition regulation marriage discussed detail treated within authority realm separate yet established congress enacting discrete statutes make determinations bear marital rights privileges term upheld authority congress state laws allowing former spouse retain life insurance proceeds federal program gave priority formal beneficiary designation rules wife second marriage survived husband hillman maretta see also ridgway ridgway wissner wissner one example general principle federal government acts exercise proper authority wide choice mechanisms means adopt see mcculloch maryland wheat congress power ensure efficiency administration programs choose larger goals policies pursue precedents involving congressional statutes affect marriages family status illustrate point addressing interaction state domestic relations federal immigration law congress determined marriages entered purpose procuring alien admission immigrant qualify noncitizen status even noncitizen marriage valid proper purposes ed supp establishing criteria social security benefits congress decided although state law determine general qualifies applicant spouse marriages also recognized regardless particular state view relationships though discrete examples establish constitutionality limited federal laws regulate meaning marriage order federal policy doma far greater reach enacts directive applicable federal statutes whole realm federal regulations operation directed class persons laws new york sought protect see goodridge department public health mass act implementing guarantee equal protection constitution state sex couples pub acts varnum brien iowa stat tit rev stat ann west supp religious freedom civil marriage equality amendment act reg dom rel law ann west supp rev code citizen initiative samesex marriage question results online http internet sources visited june available clerk case file md fam law code ann lexis act amend title delaware code relating domestic relations provide civil marriage convert existing civil unions civil marriages del laws ch act relating marriage providing civil marriage two persons providing exemptions protections based religious association laws ch act relating domestic relations persons eligible marry laws ch order assess validity intervention necessary discuss extent state power authority marriage matter history tradition state laws defining regulating marriage course must respect constitutional rights persons see loving virginia subject guarantees regulation domestic relations area long regarded virtually exclusive province sosna iowa recognition civil marriages central state domestic relations law applicable residents citizens see williams north carolina state sovereign rightful legitimate concern marital status persons domiciled within borders definition marriage foundation state broader authority regulate subject domestic relations respect rotection offspring property interests enforcement marital responsibilities ibid time adoption constitution possessed full power subject marriage divorce constitution delegated authority government subject marriage divorce haddock haddock see also burrus whole subject domestic relations husband wife parent child belongs laws laws consistent allocation authority federal government history deferred policy decisions respect domestic relations de sylva ballentine example held decide widow widower deceased author executors next kin copyright act requires reference law state created legal relationships federal law domestic relations order respect principle federal courts general rule adjudicate issues marital status even might otherwise basis federal jurisdiction see ankenbrandt richards federal courts hear divorce custody cases even arise diversity virtually exclusive primacy regulation domestic relations blackmun concurring judgment significance state responsibilities definition regulation marriage dates nation beginning constitution adopted common understanding domestic relations husband wife parent child matters reserved ohio ex rel popovici agler marriage laws vary respects state state example required minimum age vermont new hampshire compare stat tit rev stat ann west supp likewise permissible degree consanguinity vary permit first cousins marry handful iowa washington see iowa code rev code prohibit practice rules every event consistent within state background doma rejects precept incidents benefits obligations marriage uniform married couples within state though may vary subject constitutional guarantees one state next despite considerations unnecessary decide whether federal intrusion state power violation constitution disrupts federal balance state power defining marital relation central relevance case quite apart principles federalism state decision give class persons right marry conferred upon dignity status immense import state used historic essential authority define marital relation way role power making decision enhanced recognition dignity protection class community doma reach extent departs history tradition reliance state law define unusual character especially suggest careful consideration determine whether obnoxious constitutional provision romer evans quoting louisville gas elec coleman federal government uses class opposite purpose impose restrictions disabilities result requires address whether resulting injury indignity deprivation essential part liberty protected fifth amendment state new york treats alike federal law deems unlike law designed injure class state seeks protect acting first recognize allow marriages new york responding initiative sought voice shaping destiny times bond slip actions without doubt proper exercise sovereign authority within federal system way framers intended dynamics state government federal system allow formation consensus respecting way members discrete community treat daily contact constant interaction interest defining regulating marital relation subject constitutional guarantees stems understanding marriage routine classification purposes certain statutory benefits private consensual sexual intimacy two adult persons sex may punished state form one element personal bond enduring lawrence texas recognition validity marriages performed jurisdictions authorizing unions marriages new york sought give protection dignity bond couples wished married state acted give lawful conduct lawful status status legal acknowledgment intimate relationship two people relationship deemed state worthy dignity community equal marriages reflects community considered perspective historical roots institution marriage evolving understanding meaning equality iv doma seeks injure class new york seeks protect violates basic due process equal protection principles applicable federal government see amdt bolling sharpe constitution guarantee equality must least mean bare congressional desire harm politically unpopular group justify disparate treatment group ment agriculture moreno determining whether law motived improper animus purpose iscriminations unusual especially require careful consideration supra quoting romer supra doma survive principles responsibility regulation domestic relations important indicator substantial societal impact state classifications daily lives customs people doma unusual deviation usual tradition recognizing accepting state definitions marriage operates deprive couples benefits responsibilities come federal recognition marriages strong evidence law purpose effect disapproval class avowed purpose practical effect law question impose disadvantage separate status stigma upon enter marriages made lawful unquestioned authority history doma enactment text demonstrate interference equal dignity marriages dignity conferred exercise sovereign power incidental effect federal statute essence house report announced conclusion appropriate necessary congress defend institution traditional heterosexual marriage appropriately entitled marriage act effort redefine extend homosexual couples truly radical proposal fundamentally alter institution marriage pp house concluded doma expresses moral disapproval homosexuality moral conviction heterosexuality better comports traditional especially morality deleted stated purpose law promote interest protecting traditional moral teachings reflected marriage laws ibid doubt purpose title act confirms defense marriage arguments put forward blag candid congressional purpose influence interfere state sovereign choices may married title dynamics bill indicate purpose discourage enactment state marriage laws restrict freedom choice couples married laws enacted congressional goal put thumb scales influence state decision shape marriage laws massachusetts act demonstrated purpose ensure state decides recognize marriages unions treated marriages purposes federal law raises serious question constitution fifth amendment doma operation practice confirms purpose new york adopted law permit marriage sought eliminate inequality doma frustrates objective enactment identified connection particular area federal law doma writes inequality entire code particular case hand concerns estate tax doma simple determination allowed estate tax refund among statutes numerous federal regulations doma controls laws pertaining social security housing taxes criminal sanctions copyright veterans benefits doma principal effect identify subset marriages make unequal principal purpose impose inequality reasons like governmental efficiency responsibilities well rights enhance dignity integrity person doma contrives deprive couples married laws state couples rights responsibilities creating two contradictory marriage regimes within state doma forces couples live married purpose state law unmarried purpose federal law thus diminishing stability predictability basic personal relations state found proper acknowledge protect dynamic doma undermines public private significance marriages tells couples world otherwise valid marriages unworthy federal recognition places couples unstable position marriage differentiation demeans couple whose moral sexual choices constitution protects see lawrence whose relationship state sought dignify humiliates tens thousands children raised couples law question makes even difficult children understand integrity closeness family concord families community daily lives doma married couples lives burdened reason government decree visible public ways great reach doma touches many aspects married family life mundane profound prevents married couples obtaining government healthcare benefits otherwise receive see deprives bankruptcy code special protections obligations see forces follow complicated procedure file state federal taxes jointly technical bulletin tax lexis brief federalism scholars amici curiae prohibits buried together veterans cemeteries national cemetery administration directive june certain married couples doma unequal effects even serious federal penal code makes crime assaul kidna murde member immediate family official judge federal law enforcement officer intent influence retaliate official although spouse qualifies member officer immediate family doma makes protection inapplicable spouses doma also brings financial harm children couples raises cost health care families taxing health benefits provided employers workers spouses see treas reg cfr irs private letter ruling denies reduces benefits allowed families upon loss spouse parent benefits integral part family security see social security administration social security survivors benefits benefits available surviving spouse caring couple child online http doma divests married couples duties responsibilities essential part married life cases honored accept doma force instance expected spouses support pursue educational opportunities federal law takes consideration spouse income calculating student federal financial aid eligibility see married couples exempt requirement true respect federal ethics rules federal executive agency officials prohibited participat ing personally substantially matters spouses financial interest similar statute prohibits senators senate employees spouses accepting gifts certain sources see another mandates detailed financial disclosures numerous officials spouses see app doma however rules apply spouses power constitution grants also restrains though congress great authority design laws fit conception sound national policy deny liberty protected due process clause fifth amendment explained point suffice establish principal purpose necessary effect law demean persons lawful marriage requires hold doma unconstitutional deprivation liberty person protected fifth amendment constitution liberty protected fifth amendment due process clause contains within prohibition denying person equal protection laws see bolling adarand constructors peña fifth amendment withdraws government power degrade demean way law equal protection guarantee fourteenth amendment makes fifth amendment right specific better understood preserved class doma directs restrictions restraints persons joined marriages made lawful state doma singles class persons deemed state entitled recognition protection enhance liberty imposes disability class refusing acknowledge status state finds dignified proper doma instructs federal officials indeed persons couples interact including children marriage less worthy marriages others federal statute invalid legitimate purpose overcomes purpose effect disparage injure state marriage laws sought protect personhood dignity seeking displace protection treating persons living marriages less respected others federal statute violation fifth amendment opinion holding confined lawful marriages judgment appeals second circuit affirmed ordered roberts dissenting petitioner edith schlain windsor capacity executor estate thea clara spyer et al writ certiorari appeals second circuit june chief justice roberts dissenting agree justice scalia lacks jurisdiction review decisions courts merits constitutional dispute decides decide also agree justice scalia congress acted constitutionally passing defense marriage act doma interests uniformity stability amply justified congress decision retain definition marriage point adopted every state nation every nation world post dissenting opinion majority sees sinister motive pointing federal government generally though uniformly deferred state definitions marriage past true course none prior variations involved differences something majority puts thought people essential definition marriage role function throughout history civilization ante federal government treated fundamental question differently treated variations consanguinity minimum age hardly surprising hardly enough support conclusion principal purpose ante representatives senators voted president signed bare desire harm snippets legislative history banal title act majority points suffice make showing least without convincing evidence act principal purpose codify malice furthered legitimate government interests tar political branches brush bigotry disagree result majority analysis leads case think important point analysis leads logic opinion decide distinct question whether exercise historic essential authority define marital relation ante may continue utilize traditional definition marriage majority goes way make explicit penultimate sentence opinion opinion holding confined lawful marriages ante referring marriages state already recognized result local community considered perspective historical roots institution marriage evolving understanding meaning equality ante justice scalia believes unreasoned disclaime post view though disclaimer logical necessary consequence argument majority chosen adopt dominant theme majority opinion federal government intrusion area central state domestic relations law applicable residents citizens sufficiently unusual set alarm bells ante think majority goes course said undeniable judgment based federalism majority extensively chronicles doma departure normal allocation responsibility state federal governments emphasizing doma rejects precept incidents benefits obligations marriage uniform married couples within state ante departure one state adopts keeps definition marriage differs neighbor entirely expected state definitions vary subject constitutional guarantees one state next ibid thus state power defining marital relation central relevance majority decision strike doma power come play side board future cases constitutionality state marriage definitions concerns state diversity sovereignty weigh doma constitutionality case see ante central feature majority analysis unique doma many considerations periphery well example majority focuses legislative history title particular act ante considerations course irrelevant future cases different statutes majority emphasizes doma systemwide enactment identified connection particular area federal law state definition marriage foundation state broader authority regulate subject domestic relations respect rotection offspring property interests enforcement marital responsibilities ante federal decision undermined majority view dignity already conferred exercise sovereign power ante whereas state decision whether expand definition marriage traditional contours involves similar concern may future resolve challenges state marriage definitions affecting couples issue however us case hold today lack jurisdiction consider particular context hollingsworth perry ante write highlight limits majority holding reasoning today lest opinion taken resolve question believe properly us doma constitutionality also question agree explicitly acknowledges issue scalia dissenting petitioner edith schlain windsor capacity executor estate thea clara spyer et al writ certiorari appeals second circuit june justice scalia justice thomas joins chief justice joins part dissenting case power several respects power people govern power pronounce law today opinion aggrandizes latter predictable consequence diminishing former power decide case even power constitution invalidate democratically adopted legislation errors points spring forth diseased root exalted conception role institution america eager hungry tell everyone view legal question heart case standing way obstacle technicality little interest anyone people people created barrier judges intrusion lives gave judges article iii judicial power power decide abstract questions real concrete cases controversies yet plaintiff government agree entirely happen lawsuit agree got right agreed one got right well answer lies heart jurisdictional portion today opinion single sentence lays bare majority vision role says power decide case primary role determining constitutionality law least one inflicted real injury plaintiff become secondary president ante wait reader wonders windsor cured injury president glad see true says majority judicial review must march regardless lest undermine clear dictate principle act congress alleged conflict constitution emphatically province duty judicial department say law ibid internal quotation marks brackets omitted assertion judicial supremacy people representatives congress executive envisions standing rather enthroned apex government empowered decide constitutional questions always everywhere primary role image unrecognizable wrote ratified national charter knew well dangers primary power created branches government perfectly terms common commission none branches pretend exclusive superior right settling boundaries respective powers federalist rossiter ed madison people protect guard right supremacy today majority finds attractive madison confidently state fear contradiction nothing greater intrinsic value stamped authority enlightened patrons liberty government separate coordinate powers reason quite forbidden say law whenever today opinion asserts act congress alleged conflict constitution ante allegation determine outcome lawsuit contradicted party judicial power majority believes power say law giving primary role determining constitutionality laws majority must mind one foreign constitutions pronounces primacy constitutional allows primacy exercised contexts lawsuit see basic law federal republic germany art judicial power americans understood english ancestors power adjudicate conclusive effect disputed government claims civil criminal private persons disputed claims private persons government private persons sometimes though always parties disagree regard facts case regard facts regard applicable law event event becomes duty judicial department say law ante words declaring compatibility state federal laws constitution primary role separate role perform role incidentally accident necessary resolve dispute us become province duty judicial department say law politely declined washington administration request say law particular treaty matter subject concrete legal controversy correspondence public papers john jay johnston ed opinions said questions law never presented never anyone standing bring lawsuit see schlesinger reservists comm stop war richardson justice brandeis put pass upon constitutionality legislation friendly proceeding absent earnest vital controversy individuals neither work power ashwander tva concurring opinion quoting chicago grand trunk wellman authority begins ends need adjudge rights injured party stands us seeking redress lujan defenders wildlife completely absent windsor injury cured judgment favor ordinary circumstances injured directive pay tax refund suit far ordinary whatever injury suffered surely redressed action litigant asks us take final sentence solicitor general brief merits reads foregoing reasons judgment appeals affirmed brief merits emphasis added cure government injury carve stone one spend many fruitless afternoons ransacking library petitioner brief seeking affirmance judgment petitioner asks us case us exactly respondent windsor asks us provide relief judgment say judgment correct true appeals neither party sought undo judgment windsor dismissed appeal dismiss lack jurisdiction since parties agreed judgment district southern district new york suit ended proceedings contrivance object mind except elevate district judgment precedential effect courts one precedential effect throughout second circuit precedential effect throughout never agreed speak say law controversy us two centuries existed institution never suggested power decide question every party agrees nominal opponent question answer reluctantly conceded oral argument see tr oral arg closest ever come blesses today opinion ins chadha case two parties litigation disagreed position house senate intervened case chadha concerned validity mode congressional action legislative veto house senate threatened destruction claimed one institutional powers executive choosing defend permitted house senate intervene nothing like present sure chadha said statutory status altered fact executive may agree holding statute question unconstitutional statement acknowledged article iii separate requirement justiciable case controversy stated requirement satisfied presence two houses congress adverse parties later opinion chadha remarked announced intention enforce statute also sufficed permit judicial review even absent congressional participation remark true description judicial review conducted appeals houses congress inter vened case originated appeals since sought review agency action absent judgment setting aside ins order chadha faced deportation passage opinion seems addressing initial standing appeals indicated quotation lower opinion addressing standing pursue appeal remark purest dictum congressional intervention point made required adverseness beyond doubt quite incorrect private party judicial decree safely hand prevent injury additional judicial action requires party injured decree seek undo chadha intervening house senate fulfilled requirement one majority discussion requirements article iii bears resemblance jurisprudence accuses amicus appointed argue jurisdiction elid ing distinction jurisdictional requirements article iii prudential limits exercise ante proceeds call requirement adverseness prudential aspect standing standing incomprehensible plaintiff appellant standing world satisfying three standing requirements lujan majority carefully quotes ante yet article iii controversy may article iii requires plaintiff appellant standing complain opposing party denies validity complaint amicus done eliding distinctions majority calling quite separate article iii requirement adverseness parties element pronounces prudential element standing question whether majority puts retains stake sufficient support article iii jurisdiction ibid question whether controversy requires contradiction windsor find wryly amusing majority seeks dismiss requirement nothing prudential aspect sole article iii requirement standing relegating jurisdictional requirement prudential status wondrous device enabling courts ignore requirement whenever believe prudent say good idea half century ago similarly bent upon announcing view regarding constitutionality federal statute achieved goal effecting remarkably similar completely opposite distortion principles limiting jurisdiction notorious opinion flast cohen held standing merely element pronounced prudential element sole article iii requirement adverseness living chaos created decision ever since see hein freedom religion foundation live chaos created one authorities majority cites fall miles short supporting counterintuitive notion article iii controversy exist without disagreement parties deposit guaranty nat bank roper district entered judgment individual plaintiff favor based defendant bank offer pay full amount claimed plaintiff however sought appeal district denial class certification federal rule civil procedure continuing dispute parties concerning issue raised appeal true case cited majority camreta greene district found defendant state officers violated fourth amendment rendered judgment favor entitled official immunity application fourth amendment conduct clear time violation officers sought appeal holding fourth amendment violation circumscribe future conduct plaintiff continued insist fourth amendment violation occurred prudential discretion cases refer discretion deny appeal even live controversy exists discretion grant one majority cite case entertained appeal parties urged us affirm judgment existence controversy prudential requirement invented essential element article iii case controversy majority notion case friendly parties entertained long adversarial presentation issues assured participation amici curiae prepared defend vigor side issue ante effects breathtaking revolution article iii jurisprudence may argued say true presidential determinations statutes unconstitutional subject review president plaintiff agree statute unconstitutional executive enforcing unconstitutional law suit course lie suit executive admits unconstitutionality law litigation end order consent decree enjoining enforcement suit saw light day president enforced act thus gave windsor standing sue even though believed unconstitutional equally chosen appropriately say neither enforce defend statute believed unconstitutional see presidential authority decline execute unconstitutional statutes op legal counsel event windsor injured district refereed friendly scrimmage executive determination unconstitutionality escaped desire blurt view law matter left many matters left tug war president congress innumerable means including impeachment compelling president enforce laws written president evaded presentation constitutional issue simply declining appeal district appeals dispositions agreed sure much president wants insulate judgment unconstitutionality review views urged dissent produce insulation judicial review insulation executive contrivance majority brandishes famous sentence marbury madison cranch emphatically province duty judicial department say law ante internal quotation marks omitted sentence neither says implies always province duty say law much less responsibility regard primary one next sentence chief justice marshall opinion makes crucial qualification today majority ignores apply rule particular cases must necessity expound interpret rule cranch emphasis added particular case us controversy business resolve article iii province duty pronounce law views early precisely addressing question us majority instead consulted opinion chief justice taney lord veazie objection case us plaintiff defendant interest interest adverse conflict interest third persons whose rights seriously affected question law decided manner parties suit desire judgment entered circumstances purposes mere form whole proceeding contempt highly reprehensible judgment form thus procured eye law judgment nullity writ error lie upon writ therefore dismissed words marbury necessity expound interpret law case desire place center nation life cranch words response theory jurisdiction set forth justice alito dissent though less far reaching consequences majority conversion constitutionally required adverseness discretionary element standing theory dissent similarly elevates primary determiner constitutional questions involving separation powers boot increases power dangerous branch legislative department nature draw power impetuous vortex federalist madison heretofore national history president failure take care laws faithfully executed art ii brought judicial tribunal someone whose concrete interests harmed alleged failure justice alito create system congress hale executive courts vindicate institutional powers act correct perceived inadequacy execution lay rest tocqueville praise judicial system one intimately bind case made law case made one man one legislation longer exposed daily aggression parties political question judge must resolve linked interest private litigants de tocqueville democracy america mansfield winthrop eds replaced system congress executive pop immediately institutional capacity whenever president refuses implement statute believes unconstitutional whenever implements law manner congress liking justice alito notion standing likewise enormously shrink area judicial censure exercised courts legislation extend ibid example bare majority houses bring assertion executive implementation welfare programs generous failure litigant standing complain moreover indicated raines byrd congress sue executive erroneous application law injures power legislate surely executive sue congress erroneous adoption unconstitutional law injures executive power administer perhaps protracted failure act one nominations opportunities dragging courts disputes hitherto left political resolution endless justice alito dissent correct raines formally decide issue reasoning opinion spends three pages discussing famous disputes president congress regarding congressional power forbid presidential removal executive officers regarding legislative veto regarding congressional appointment executive officers regarding pocket veto surely promptly resolved lawsuit impairment branch powers alone conferred standing commence litigation never enormous power judiciary acquire ability adjudicate suits made mockery hamilton quotation montesquieu effect three powers mentioned judiciary next nothing barnes kline cadc bork dissenting quoting federalist hamilton sure congress invoke authority way justice alito proposes recourse confront president directly unimaginable evil system designed confrontation mbition counteract ing ambition federalist madison majorities houses congress care enough matter available innumerable ways compel executive action without lawsuit refusing confirm presidential appointees elimination funding nothing says enforce act quite like money little else condition crucial congress must care enough act president merely enough instruct lawyers ask us placing constitution entirely anticipated political arm wrestling permanent judicial receivership system favor way president loses lawsuit faithfully implement decree faithfully implement congress statute congress bring heel think yes direct confrontation president ii reasons think appeals power decide suit vacate decision remand appeals second circuit instructions dismiss appeal given majority volunteered view merits however proceed discuss well many remarkable things majority merits holding first rootless shifting justifications example opinion starts seven full pages traditional power define domestic relations initially fooling many readers sure thinking federalism opinion eventually told unnecessary decide whether federal intrusion state power violation constitution state power defining marital relation central relevance case quite apart principles federalism state decision give class persons right marry conferred upon dignity status immense import ante one questions power define marriage concomitant conferral dignity status point devoting seven pages describing long well established power even opinion formally disclaimed reliance upon principles federalism mentions usual tradition recognizing accepting state definitions marriage continue see ante make opinion never explains guess majority reluctant suggest defining meaning marriage federal statutes unsupported federal government enumerated nonetheless needs rhetorical basis support pretense today prohibition laws excluding marriage confined federal government leaving second shoe dropped later maybe next term guessing equally perplexing opinion references constitution guarantee equality ibid near end opinion told although equal protection guarantee fourteenth amendment makes fifth amendment due process right specific better understood preserved mean fifth amendment withdraws government power degrade demean way law ante possible interpretation statement equal protection clause even equal protection clause incorporated due process clause basis today holding portion majority opinion explains doma unconstitutional part iv begins citing bolling sharpe department agriculture moreno romer evans three cases authorities cites part iv constitution meaning except citation lawrence texas case support passing assertion constitution protects moral sexual choices couples ante moreover meant opinion confusing one opinion resolve indeed even mention central question litigation whether equal protection clause laws restricting marriage man woman reviewed mere rationality issue divided parties compare brief respondent bipartisan legal advisory group house representatives merits brief respondent windsor merits brief merits yes compare yes straub dissenting part concurring part accord previously expressed skepticism tiers scrutiny approach review classification rationality see virginia scalia dissenting nearly tell agrees opinion apply strict scrutiny central propositions taken cases like moreno certainly apply anything resembles deferential framework see heller doe classification upheld reasonably conceivable state justify majority opinion need get scrutiny question need justify holding either says doma unconstitutional deprivation liberty person protected fifth amendment constitution ante violates basic due process principles ante inflicts injury indignity kind denies essential part liberty protected fifth amendment ante majority never utters dread words substantive due process perhaps sensing disrepute doctrine fallen statements mean yet opinion argue marriage deeply rooted nation history tradition washington glucksberg claim course quite absurd suggestion also necessary precedents world doma exists one bereft liberty quoting palko connecticut might conclude loaf used longer oven wrong already overcooked expert care preparation redeem bad recipe sum nonspecific law invalid maybe grounds maybe grounds perhaps amorphous federalism component playing role motivated desire couples marriages ante proposition therefore engage observed constitution forbid government enforce traditional moral sexual norms see lawrence texas scalia dissenting swell reports restatements point enough say constitution neither requires forbids society approve marriage much neither requires forbids us approve divorce polygamy consumption alcohol however even setting aside traditional moral disapproval marriage indeed sex many perfectly valid indeed downright boring justifying rationales legislation existence end case give lie conclusion hateful hearts voted aye act importantly serve make contents legislators hearts quite irrelevant familiar principle constitutional law strike otherwise constitutional statute basis alleged illicit legislative motive least familiar principle holding contrary majority declared open season law opinion law opponents panel federal judges characterized majority concludes motive act bare desire harm politically unpopular group ante bear mind object condemnation legislature southern state familiar objects scorn see edwards aguillard respected coordinate branches congress presidency laying charge require extraordinary evidence thought every attempt made indulge anodyne explanation statute majority opposite affirmatively concealing reader arguments exist justification makes passing mention arguments put forward act defenders even trouble paraphrase describe see ante imagine harder maintain illusion act supporters unhinged members lynch mob one first describes views see choose one defenders arguments doma avoids difficult issues arise absent uniform federal definition marriage see baude beyond doma choice state law federal statutes stan rev imagine pair women marry albany move alabama recognize valid marriage parties sex code couple files next federal tax return may joint one state law controls purposes state celebration recognizes marriage state domicile answer depend whether visiting albany questions answered matter federal common law perhaps borrowing state rules state status marriage unsettled question local law see godfrey spano doma avoided uncertainty specifying marriages recognized federal purposes classic purpose definitional provision doma preserves intended effects prior legislation changes circumstance congress provided example special exemption exist spouses exemption reached spouses sort recognized state time doma passage became clear changes state law might one day alter balance doma definitional section enacted ensure experimentation automatically alter basic operation federal law unless congress made judgment animus stabilizing prudence congress hardly demonstrated unwilling make revising judgments upon due deliberation see ask tell repeal act stat mentions none instead accuses congress enacted law president signed something much worse example acted excess enumerated federal powers even drawn distinctions prove irrational legal errors may made good faith errors though majority says supporters act acted malice purpose ante disparage injure couples says motivation doma demean ibid impose inequality ante impose stigma ante deny people equal dignity ibid brand gay people unworthy ante humiliat children ibid emphasis added sure accusations quite untrue sure majority points legislation called defense marriage act defend traditional marriage condemn demean humiliate prefer arrangements defend constitution condemn demean humiliate constitutions hurl accusations casually demeans institution majority judgment resistance holding beyond pale reasoned disagreement question invalidation presumptively valid statute act majority sure purpose disparage injure degrade demean humiliate fellow human beings fellow citizens homosexual simply supporting act codify aspect marriage unquestioned society existence indeed unquestioned virtually societies virtually human history one thing society elect change another law impose change adjudging oppose hostes humani generis enemies human race penultimate sentence majority opinion naked declaration opinion holding confined couples joined marriages made lawful state ante heard bald unreasoned disclaimer lawrence declared constitutional right homosexual sodomy assured case nothing nothing whether government must give formal recognition relationship homosexual persons seek enter told doma invalid demeans couple whose moral sexual choices constitution protects ante accompanying citation lawrence takes real cheek today majority assure us going door constitutional requirement give formal recognition marriage issue preceded assurance lecture superior majority moral judgment favor marriage congress hateful moral judgment promise thing confine holding sense get away mean suggest disagreement chief justice view ante dissenting opinion lower federal courts state courts distinguish today case issue state denial marital status couples even theoretically lord opinion rationales one federalism noises among distinguished many ways deserves state lower federal courts take word distinguish away opinion however view take state prohibition marriage indicated beyond mistaking today opinion said real rationale today opinion whatever disappearing trail legalistic one chooses follow doma motivated desire couples marriages supra easy indeed inevitable reach conclusion regard state laws denying couples marital status consider easy inevitable make following substitutions passage today opinion ante doma state law principal effect identify subset marriages ally protected sexual relationships see lawrence make unequal principal purpose impose inequality reasons like governmental efficiency responsibilities well rights enhance dignity integrity person doma state law contrives deprive couples married laws state enjoying constitutionally protected sexual relationships couples rights responsibilities try passage ante doma state law tells couples world otherwise valid marriages relationships unworthy federal state recognition places couples unstable position marriage relationship differentiation demeans couple whose moral sexual choices constitution protects see lawrence ante even require alteration except invented number humiliates tens thousands children raised couples law question makes even difficult children understand integrity closeness family concord families community daily lives similarly transposable passages deliberately transposable think abound sum finds horrific congress irrationally hatefully robbed couples personhood dignity state legislatures conferred upon certitude similarly appalled state legislatures irrational hateful failure acknowledge personhood dignity first place ante far concerned one fooled matter listening waiting shoe formally declaring anyone opposed marriage enemy human decency majority arms well every challenger state law restricting marriage traditional definition henceforth challengers lead declaration legitimate purpose served law claim traditional definition purpose effect disparage injure personhood dignity couples see ante majority limiting assurance meaningless face language like majority well knows language result judicial distortion society debate marriage debate seem need clumsy help member institution debate public controversies touch institution central lives many inspire attendant passion good people sides public controversies ever demonstrate vividly beauty framers gave us gift pawns today buy stolen moment spotlight system government permits us rule since doma passage citizens sides question seen victories seen defeats plebiscites legislation persuasion loud voices words democracy victories one place see north carolina amdt providing arriage one man one woman domestic legal union shall valid recognized state approved popular vote may offset victories places others see maryland question establishing maryland civil marriage laws allow gay lesbian couples obtain civil marriage license approved popular vote november even gle state question come differently different occasions compare maine question permitting state maine issue marriage licenses couples approved popular vote november maine question rejecting new law lets couples marry approved popular vote november majority telling story hate neighbor come along us truth complicated hard admit one political opponents monsters especially struggle like one challenge end proves today handle bad reminder disagreement something fundamental marriage still politically legitimate fit task earlier times called judicial temperament might covered honor today promising sides debate settle respect resolution might let people decide majority rejoice today decision despair nature controversy matters much many cheated sides robbing winners honest victory losers peace comes fair defeat owed better dissent alito dissenting petitioner edith schlain windsor capacity executor estate thea clara spyer et al writ certiorari appeals second circuit june justice alito justice thomas joins parts ii iii dissenting nation engaged heated debate marriage debate bottom nature institution marriage respondent edith windsor supported asks intervene debate although couches argument different terms seeks holding enshrines constitution particular understanding marriage sex partners makes difference constitution however dictate choice leaves choice people acting elected representatives federal state levels therefore hold congress violate windsor constitutional rights enacting defense marriage act doma stat defines meaning marriage federal statutes either confer upon married persons certain federal benefits impose upon certain federal obligations turn first question standing view clearly proper petitioner case ask us overturn judgment alter judgment way quite contrary argues emphatically favor correctness judgment never reviewed decision sole behest party took position render advisory opinion violation article iii dictates reasons given justice scalia dissent find arguments contrary persuasive whether bipartisan legal advisory group house representatives blag standing petition much difficult question also significantly closer question whether intervenors lingsworth perry ante also decides today standing appeal remarkable simultaneously decided receive ha sought deposit guaranty nat bank roper proper petitioner case intervenors hollingsworth represent party lost lower view hollingsworth intervenors blag party invoking authority sufficient stake permit appeal injury fact caused conduct complained redressed favorable decision camreta greene slip quoting lujan defenders wildlife present case house representatives authorized blag represent interests suffered injury ins chadha held two houses congress proper parties file petition defense constitutionality veto statute internal quotation marks omitted accordingly granted decided petitions senate house addition executive petition two houses standing petition surprising appeals decision chadha holding veto unconstitutional limited congress power legislate discussing article iii standing suggested congress suffered similar injury whenever federal legislation passed struck noting long held congress proper party defend validity statute agency government defendant charged enforcing statute agrees plaintiffs statute inapplicable unconstitutional attempts distinguish chadha ground involved unusual statute vested house senate special procedural rights namely right effectively veto executive action brief jurisdiction distinction without difference appeals decision chadha affirmed impaired congress power striking veto second circuit decision impairs congress legislative power striking act congress explained fact impairment issue chadha special procedural relevance whether congress suffered injury indeed legislating congress central function impairment function grievous injury impairment procedural decision coleman miller bolsters conclusion coleman held group state senators standing challenge lower decision approving procedures used ratify amendment federal constitution reasoned senators votes otherwise carried day nullified action see plaintiffs include twenty senators whose votes ratification overridden virtually held naught although right contentions votes sufficient defeat ratification think senators plain direct adequate interest maintaining effectiveness votes find departure principle recognizing instant case least twenty senators whose votes contention sustained sufficient defeat resolution ratifying proposed constitutional amendment interest controversy treated state basis entertaining deciding federal questions sufficient give jurisdiction review decision striking doma unconstitutional second circuit effectively held naught act congress coleman necessary parties amendment ratification house representatives necessary party doma passage indeed house vote sufficient prevent doma repeal chosen execute repeal judicially amicus err arguing raines byrd contrary case held members congress voted nay line item veto act standing challenge statute federal raines inapposite two reasons first raines dealt individual members congress specifically pointed individual members lack institutional endorsement sign standing problem attach importance fact appellees authorized represent respective houses congress action indeed houses actively oppose suit see also citing cases effect members collegial bodies standing perfect appeal body declined take internal quotation marks omitted second members raines unlike state senators coleman pivotal figures whose votes caused act fail absent challenged action indeed telling raines characterized coleman standing proposition legislators whose votes sufficient defeat enact specific legislative act standing sue legislative action goes effect go effect ground votes completely nullified contrast passage house needed doma become law art bicameralism presentment requirements legislation appreciate argument constitution confers president alone authority defend federal law litigation view explained argument contrary holding chadha certainly contrary chadha endorsement principle congress proper party defend validity statute executive refuses constitutional grounds see also senate legal counsel shall defend constitutionality acts congress placed issue accordingly narrow category cases strikes act congress executive declines defend act congress standing defend undefended statute proper party ii windsor argue doma violates equal protection principles found fifth amendment due process clause see brief respondent windsor merits brief merits cf bolling sharpe rests holding related arguments see ante marriage presents highly emotional important question public policy difficult question constitutional law constitution guarantee right enter marriage indeed provision constitution speaks issue sometimes found due process clauses substantive component guarantees liberties beyond absence physical restraint holding doma unconstitutional deprivation liberty person protected fifth amendment constitution ante suggests substantive due process may partially underlie decision today well established substantive component due process clause protects fundamental rights liberties objectively rooted nation history tradition washington glucksberg snyder massachusetts referring fundamental rights rooted traditions conscience people ranked fundamental well concept ordered liberty liberty justice exist sacrificed glucksberg supra quoting palko connecticut beyond dispute right marriage deeply rooted nation history tradition country state permitted marriage massachusetts judicial held limiting marriage couples violated state constitution see goodridge department public health mass right marriage deeply rooted traditions nations country allowed couples marry netherlands windsor seek therefore protection deeply rooted right recognition new right seek innovation legislative body elected people unelected judges faced request judges cause caution humility family ancient universal human institution family structure reflects characteristics civilization changes family structure popular understanding marriage family profound effects past changes understanding marriage example gradual ascendance idea romantic love prerequisite marriage consequences process consequences come complex involving interaction numerous factors tends occur extended period time expect something similar take place marriage becomes widely accepted consequences change known unlikely ascertainable time think allowing marriage seriously undermine institution marriage see girgis anderson george marriage man woman defense finnis marriage basic exigent good monist others think recognition marriage fortify institution see sullivan virtually normal argument homosexuality rauch gay marriage good gays good straights good america present one including social scientists philosophers historians predict certainty ramifications widespread acceptance marriage judges certainly equipped make assessment members authority responsibility interpret apply constitution thus constitution contained provision guaranteeing right marry person sex duty enforce right constitution simply speak issue marriage system government ultimate sovereignty rests people people right control destiny change question fundamental made people elected officials iii perhaps show marriage fundamental right constitution windsor couch arguments equal protection terms argue doma discriminates basis sexual orientation classifications based sexual orientation trigger form heightened scrutiny survive scrutiny maintain governmental interests purports serve sufficiently important adequately shown serves interests well holding seems rest equal protection guarantee fourteenth amendment ante although careful adopt windsor argument view approach windsor advocate misguided equal protection framework upon windsor rely judicial construct provides useful mechanism analyzing certain universe equal protection cases framework ill suited use evaluating constitutionality laws based traditional understanding marriage fundamentally turn marriage underlying equal protection jurisprudence central notion classification reasonable arbitrary must rest upon ground difference fair substantial relation object legislation persons similarly circumstanced shall treated alike reed reed quoting royter guano virginia modern tiers scrutiny windsor rely heavily heuristic help judges determine classifications fair substantial relation object legislation reed supra example classifications subject strict scrutiny classifications must narrowly tailored achieve compelling government interest parents involved community schools seattle school dist internal quotation marks omitted seldom relevant achievement legitimate state interest laws grounded considerations deemed reflect prejudice antipathy cleburne cleburne living center cf stevens concurring utterly irrational limit franchise basis height weight equally invalid limit basis skin color none attributes bearing citizen willingness ability exercise civil right contrast characteristics subject intermediate scrutiny classifications must achievement important governmental objective virginia scalia dissenting sometimes relevant considerations taken account legislators generally provid sensible ground different treatment cleburne supra example held statutory rape laws criminalize sexual intercourse woman age years place similar liability partners underage men grounded real distinction young men young women similarly situated respect problems risks sexual intercourse michael superior sonoma plurality opnion plurality reasoned nly women may become pregnant suffer disproportionately profound physical emotional psychological consequences sexual activity ibid contexts however found classifications based gender arbitrary reed supra based outmoded notions relative capabilities men women cleburne supra state provides man must always preferred equally qualified woman seek administer estate deceased party see reed supra finally review applies classifications based distinguishing characteristics relevant interests state authority implement cleburne supra long recognized equal protection laws must coexist practical necessity legislation classifies one purpose another resulting disadvantages various groups persons romer evans result cases view classification issue inherently suspect adarand constructors peña internal quotation marks omitted courts reluctant federal system respect separation powers closely scrutinize legislative choices whether extent interests pursued cleburne supra asking determine doma subject violates heightened scrutiny windsor thus ask us rule presence two members opposite sex rationally related marriage white skin voting ability administer estate striking request one unelected judges pause granting acceptance argument cast cling traditional beliefs nature marriage role bigots superstitious fools asking strike doma satisfying form heightened scrutiny windsor really seeking resolve debate two competing views marriage first older view call traditional conjugal view sees marriage intrinsically institution blag notes virtually every culture including many influenced abrahamic religions limited marriage people opposite sex brief respondent blag merits citing hernandez robles decades ago accepted truth almost everyone ever lived society marriage existed marriages participants different sex blag attempts explain phenomenon arguing institution marriage created purpose channeling heterosexual intercourse structure supports child rearing brief respondent blag others explain basis institution philosophical terms argue marriage essentially solemnizing comprehensive exclusive permanent union intrinsically ordered producing new life even always see girgis anderson george marriage man woman defense modern cultural changes weakened link marriage procreation popular mind doubt throughout human history across many cultures marriage viewed exclusively institution one inextricably linked procreation biological kinship newer view call vision marriage vision primarily defines marriage solemnization mutual commitment marked strong emotional attachment sexual attraction two persons least applies heterosexual couples view marriage plays prominent role popular understanding institution indeed popular culture infused understanding marriage proponents marriage argue gender differentiation relevant vision exclusion couples institution marriage rank discrimination constitution codify either views marriage although suspect hard time adoption constitution fifth amendment find americans take traditional view granted silence constitution question enough end matter far judiciary concerned yet windsor implicitly ask us endorse view marriage reject traditional view thereby arrogating power decide question philosophers historians social scientists theologians better qualified constitutional order assigns resolution questions nature people presume enshrine either vision marriage constitutional jurisprudence legislatures however little choice decide two views long made clear neither political branches federal government state governments required neutral competing visions good provided vision good adopt countermanded constitution see rust sullivan government make value judgment favoring childbirth quoting maher rue accordingly congress entitled enact laws recognizing either two understandings marriage given size government degree regulates daily life seems unlikely either congress maintain complete neutrality even tried assiduously rather fully embracing arguments made windsor strikes doma classification properly supported objectives reaches conclusion part believes encroaches upon sovereign prerogative define marriage see ante title dynamics bill indicate purpose discourage enactment state marriage laws restrict freedom choice couples married laws enacted congressional goal put thumb scales influence state decision shape marriage quoting massachusetts dept health human indeed ultimate conclusion doma falls afoul fifth amendment singles class persons deemed state entitled recognition protection enhance liberty imposes disability class refusing acknowledge status state finds dignified proper ante emphasis added extent takes position question marriage resolved primarily state level wholeheartedly agree hope ultimately permit people state decide question unless willing allow occur whiffs federalism today opinion soon scattered wind event doma view encroach prerogatives assuming course many federal statutes affected doma already done section prevent state recognizing marriage extending couples right privilege benefit obligation stemming state law define class persons federal law extends certain special benefits upon federal law imposes certain special burdens provisions congress used marital status way defining class part assume viewed marriage valuable institution fostered part viewed married couples comprising unique type economic unit merits special regulatory treatment assuming congress power constitution enact laws affected congress power define category persons laws apply reasons hold doma violate fifth amendment respectfully dissent footnotes even advanced scavenger hunt one might search annals law another motion dismiss like one filed district argued agree plaintiff dismiss complaint emphasis mine gotten exactly asked promptly appealed justice department refusal defend legislation accord longstanding entirely reasonable practice declining defend legislation view infringes upon presidential powers justification justice department abandoning law present case majority opinion makes point scolding president failure defend constitutionality act congress based constitutional theory yet established judicial decisions ante rebuke majority gladly gives president wants contrary precedent decides case even decides way president wishes despite abandonment defense consequent absence case controversy justice alito attempts limit argument claiming congress injured therefore appeal statute held unconstitutional without presidential defense injured statute held unconstitutional despite presidential defense understand line injury congress whether president defended statute injury threatened congress able participate suit beginning president statute declared unconstitutional therefore inoperative injury injury statute declared unconstitutional president rendered inoperative consequent failure enforce president simply declines enforce without opining constitutionality inoperativeness constitutes injury impairment legislative function justice alito puts post make difference two branches inflicts whether constitution pretext principled predictable system jurisprudence rest upon shifting concept injury designed support standing like agreed justice alito distinction opinion raines byrd involved original suit members congress challenging assertedly unconstitutional law written quite differently justice alito distinguishing case grounds quite irrelevant theory standing unnecessary suggestion impossible given federal government long history making pronouncements regarding marriage example conditioning utah entry union upon prohibition polygamy see act july ch stat constitution utah must provide perfect toleration religious sentiment provided polygamous plural marriages forever prohibited since equal protection clause technically applies see amdt bolling moreno dealing federal action relied upon equal protection component due process clause fifth amendment moreno north carolina state board elections official results primary election may constitutional amendment maryland state board elections official presidential general election results state questions question maine bureau elections referendum tabulation question maine bureau elections referendum election tabulations question footnotes precedents make clear order support jurisdiction blag must demonstrate article iii standing right quite apart status intervenor see diamond charles although intervenors considered parties entitled among things seek review intervenor right continue suit absence party whose side intervention permitted contingent upon showing intervenor fulfills requirements art iii citation omitted arizonans official english arizona standing defend appeal place original defendant less standing sue demands litigant possess direct stake outcome internal quotation marks omitted intervenor step shoes original party unless intervenor independently fulfills requirements article iii internal quotation marks omitted res blag continues speak articulates institutional position house litigation matters appears including windsor buckley valeo contrary statements concerned enforcement defense patchwork partnerships comparative overview registration schemes europe legal recognition partnerships fuchs rev sociologists documented sometimes takes decades effects social changes like sharp rise divorce rates following advent divorce children society see generally wallerstein lewis blakeslee unexpected legacy divorce year landmark study among holding position deplore applaud predicted development compare wardle multiply replenish considering marriage light state interests marital procreation harv pub culturally legalization marriage send message undermine social boundaries relating marriage family relations confusion social roles linked marriage parenting tremendous message goes way sexual behavior procreation parenthood wreak greatest havoc among groups vulnerable individuals need encouragement bright line laws clear social mores concerning procreative responsibility gallagher gay marriage weaken marriage social institution reply andrew koppelman thomas idea marriage really matter society really need social institution manages attractions interests children society taking already weakened social institution subjecting radical new redefinitions hoping consequences probably neither wise compassionate idea brownworth something borrowed something blue marriage right queers queers marriage wharton phillips eds former president george bush correct allowing couples marry weaken institution marriage certainly make marriage far better concept previously willis marriage saved forum nation celebrating fact conferring legitimacy marriage homosexual relations introduce implicit revolt institution heart degree question intractable typical judicial processes decisionmaking highlighted trial hollingsworth perry ante case trial judge receiving testimony expert witnesses purported make findings fact questions marriage came perry schwarzenegger supp nd cal finding fact marriage man woman traditionally organized based presumptions division labor along gender lines men seen suited certain types work women others women seen suited raise children men seen suited provide family marriage finding fact marriage state recognition approval couple choice live remain committed one another form household based feelings one another join economic partnership support one another dependents effect legalizing marriage marriage finding fact permitting couples marry affect number couples marry divorce cohabit children outside marriage otherwise affect stability marriages times trial reached heights parody trial judge questioned ability take account views great thinkers past unavailable testify person courtroom see tr vrw nd cal pp spectacle enough professors constitutional law argued bound accept trial judge findings including major philosophical questions predictions future unless clearly erroneous see brief constitutional law civil procedure professors amici curiae hollingsworth perry pp district factual findings compelling given significant weight standard review credit adopt trial findings result rigorous exacting application federal rules evidence supported reliable research unanimous consensus mainstream social science experts arrogant legal culture lost appreciation limitations take suggestion seriously