Veterans

September 6, 2013

Feds won’t enforce same-sex veterans law

The Obama administration said Wednesday it will stop enforcing a law that blocks benefits to partners of military veterans in same-sex marriages.

In a letter to congressional leaders, Attorney General Eric Holder said that a provision in federal law on benefits to veterans and their families defines “spouse” to mean a person of the opposite sex. He says that definition leaves out legally married same-sex couples, and runs afoul of a June Supreme Court ruling.

The court declared unconstitutional a provision in the Defense of Marriage Act restricting the words marriage and spouse to apply only to heterosexual unions. Holder says that like the Defense of Marriage Act, the provision in the veterans benefits law has the effect of placing lawfully married same-sex couples in a second-tier marriage.

“Decisions by the Executive not to enforce federal laws are appropriately rare,” Holder told Congress. “Nevertheless, the unique circumstances presented here warrant non-enforcement.”

He said the Supreme Court’s conclusion that DOMA imposes a stigma on everyone in same-sex marriages “would seem to apply equally” to the veterans benefits law. Holder noted that after the Supreme Court’s decision, the Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group of the House of Representatives withdrew from a pending lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the veterans benefits provisions.

President Barack Obama directed the executive branch to cease enforcement of the provision, Holder wrote.

Last week, a federal judge in Los Angeles ruled that a lesbian Army veteran and her spouse should be entitled to disability benefits, given the Supreme Court’s recent ruling.

U.S. District Judge Consuelo Marshall said that federal law defining a spouse as a person of the opposite sex is unconstitutional since the high court’s decision allowing legally married gay couples the right to health care benefits.

Although the Supreme Court did not directly address the constitutionality of the veterans benefits provisions, the reasoning of the opinion “strongly supports the conclusion that those provisions are unconstitutional,” Holder wrote.

The Justice Department has been tapped by the White House to ensure that couples in same-sex marriages receive all federal benefits to which they are entitled. The Social Security Administration says it has started processing spousal retirement claims for same-sex couples and paying benefits. Last week, the government said that all legally married gay couples will be able to file joint federal tax returns even if they reside in states that do not recognize same-sex marriages.

Many of the changes are relatively easy to make because they involve federal regulations, but the veterans benefits present a more difficult issue because that prohibition is part of federal law.

“Continued enforcement would likely have a tangible adverse effect on the families of veterans and, in some circumstances, active-duty service members and reservists, with respect to survival, health care, home loan and other benefits,” Holder wrote.

Because of the way federal law on the Department of Veterans Affairs is worded, the Sept. 4 announcement does not apply to same-sex couples who live in a state that does not recognize gay marriage. Justice Department spokesman Brian Fallon said the issue is under review.

A gay rights group says it’s a problem. “We would like to see the Department of Veterans Affairs adopt a standard where the agency accepts a valid marriage license from any jurisdiction,” said Michael Cole-Schwartz, a spokesman for Human Rights Campaign, the nation’s largest lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender political organization.

“There’s no reason to treat veterans who live in one state differently than veterans who happen to live in a state that doesn’t recognize them,” Cole-Schwartz said.

 




All of this week's top headlines to your email every Friday.


 
 

 

Headlines January 28, 2015

News: Panel will propose new military retirement system - The long-awaited report on military compensation set to drop Thursday will propose fundamental changes to military retirement and health care benefits, according to several people familiar with the report. Source: DOD to request $585 billion for fiscal 2016 - The Department of Defense is preparing to submit a...
 
 

News Briefs January 28, 2015

Defense contractor to pay $2 million to settle claims A Northern California defense contractor will pay the federal government $2 million to settle claims about its manufacturing of parts for remote-controlled aircraft. The U.S. Attorney’s Office in Sacramento says Sacramento-based Composite Engineering Inc. agreed to pay the money to end allegations that it artificially inflated...
 
 
Navy photograph

USS Roosevelt marks 200,000 trap

Navy photograph An F/A-18F Super Hornet flown by Capt. Daniel Grieco, commanding officer of the aircraft carrier USS Theodore Roosevelt (CVN 71), and Capt. Benjamin Hewlett, deputy commander of Carrier Air Wing (CVW) 1, complet...
 

 
Navy photograph by PO1 William Larned

USS California returns from maiden deployment

Navy photograph by PO1 William Larned The Virginia-class attack submarine USS California (SSN 781) returns from its maiden deployment to its homeport at Naval Submarine Base New London. Under the command of Cmdr. Shawn Huey, Ca...
 
 
Army photograph

Army proves new watercraft capabilities

Army photograph Marine Corps assets are loaded onto the USNS Sgt. Matej Kocak (T-AK 3005), from an U.S. Army Landing Craft Utility, or LCU, USAV Port Hudson during port operations, at White Beach Naval Base, Jan. 22, 2015. Sold...
 
 

Orbital stockholders approve merger with ATK’s aerospace, defense groups

Orbital Sciences Corporation announced Jan. 27 that at a special meeting, the company’s stockholders voted overwhelmingly to approve the proposed merger with the Aerospace and Defense Groups of Alliant Techsystems Inc., pursuant to the definitive transaction agreement dated April 28, 2014. Approximately 99 percent of the votes cast at the special meeting voted in favor...
 




0 Comments


Be the first to comment!


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>