Windsor v. United States (in part)

E90997

Windsor v. United States (in part) is a landmark 2013 U.S. Supreme Court decision that struck down key portions of the Defense of Marriage Act, advancing federal recognition of same-sex marriages.


Statements (52)

Predicate Object
instanceOf United States Supreme Court case
constitutional law case
federal jurisdiction case
landmark civil rights case
same-sex marriage case
appealedFrom United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
arguedDate 2013-03-27
challengedProvision Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act
challengedStatute Defense of Marriage Act
citation 133 S. Ct. 2675
186 L. Ed. 2d 808
570 U.S. 744
constitutionalProvisionInterpreted Due Process Clause
surface form: Fifth Amendment Due Process Clause

equal protection principles incorporated into the Fifth Amendment
counselForRespondent Roberta A. Kaplan
counselForUnitedStates Donald B. Verrilli, Jr.
decisionDate 2013-06-26
defendant United States of America
dissentingJustice Antonin Scalia NERFINISHED
Clarence Thomas NERFINISHED
John G. Roberts, Jr. NERFINISHED
Samuel A. Alito, Jr. NERFINISHED
docketNumber No. 12-307
fullName United States v. Windsor
holding Section 3 of DOMA is unconstitutional as a deprivation of the equal liberty of persons protected by the Fifth Amendment
federal government must recognize same-sex marriages that are lawful under state law
the Court had jurisdiction despite the Executive’s agreement with the lower court judgment
impact expanded federal benefits to married same-sex couples
invalidated federal non-recognition of same-sex marriages valid under state law
paved the way for Obergefell v. Hodges
joinedByInMajority Elena Kagan
Ruth Bader Ginsburg
Sonia Sotomayor
Stephen G. Breyer NERFINISHED
jurisdiction federal question jurisdiction
legalIssue Article III standing
equal protection under the Fifth Amendment
federal recognition of same-sex marriages
jurisdiction when the United States declines to defend a statute
majorityOpinionBy Anthony M. Kennedy NERFINISHED
originatingCourt United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
party Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group of the U.S. House of Representatives
plaintiff Edith Schlain Windsor
relatedCase Hollingsworth v. Perry
Obergefell v. Hodges
remedy affirmed the judgment of the Second Circuit
secondCircuitHolding heightened scrutiny applies to classifications based on sexual orientation
shortName Windsor
subjectMatter LGBT rights in the United States
marriage recognition
termOfCourt October Term 2012
vote 5-4

Referenced by (1)

Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.

Equal Protection Clause basisFor Windsor v. United States (in part)