Obama applauds Supreme Court's Doma and Prop 8 rulings – as it happened

P.S: quite a scene in the West Village.

We're going to wrap up our live blog coverage for the day. Here's a summary of where things stand:

It's unclear how long it will take for same-sex couples in California to resume marrying. Governor Jerry Brown directed county clerks to start issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples as soon as a federal appeals court lifts the ban, in about 30 days. But proponents of Prop 8, the same-sex marriage ban, promised future challenges to the court ruling that struck down Prop 8.

The supreme court found the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act to be "unconstitutional as a deprivation of the equal liberty of persons that is protected by the Fifth Amendment," in a 5-4 decision with Justice Kennedy writing for the majority. In a dissent read from the bench, Justice Scalia said the court had overstepped its bounds.

The defense department announced it would take steps immediately to extend benefits for same sex couples. "The Supreme Court's ruling means that the Defense Department will extend all benefits to same-sex spouses of military personnel that are currently extended to opposite-sex spouses," the Pentagon said.

President Obama hailed the Supreme Court decision striking down Doma. "I applaud the decision," he said in the statement. "This was discrimination enshrined in law":

Eoin Reynolds reports for the Guardian from San Francisco, where religious leaders held a press conference to celebrate the day's news. A small crowd gathered San Francisco's Grace Cathedral, Eoin reports:

Reverend Roland Stringfellow said that many church leaders believe gay marriage is an affront to their religious freedom, but he and many others do not agree.

"Many clergy of a variety of faiths believe it is our religious freedom to welcome anyone who wishes to live in the light of life and truth," he said. "Today we open our doors to all couples who want to be joined in love."

Reverend Charles Lewis, a Lutheran minister with the Society of St Francis, has been working with the gay community in San Francisco since the 1960s. At that time the struggle was to prevent police harassment and violence towards gay people.

"It has taken us 50 years to get to marriage equality," he said, "but we must remain vigilant. What we have won today has been won by law and it can be taken away by law."

His colleague Megan Rohrer is the first transgender Lutheran minister, having been ordained in 2009. She hailed the day as a victory but warned there is much more to do.

"There are still 37 states where it is not legal for gay and lesbian couples to get married," Rohrer said. "There are still some rights that are denied to transgender individuals. In some states the courts have denied the right of transgender people to marry at all because they do not recognise their gender."

Representatives of the Jewish community also turned out in support of gay marriage.

Rabbi Doug Kahn, the executive director of the Jewish Community Relations Council, said: "The organized Jewish community overwhelmingly supports gay marriage equality out of an abiding commitment to civil rights in our society and therefore applauds today's Supreme Court decisions as a major step forward."

Here's Andrew Sullivan's take on Bill Clinton's statement applauding the demise of Doma. Sullivan quotes Clinton, then provides a short roundup of the former president's record on marriage equality and gay rights:

 – former president Bill Clinton, who signed DOMA, insisted it was constitutional at the time, double-crossed the gay activists who originally funded him, ran ads in the South bragging of passing DOMA, doubled the rate of gay discharges from the military and signed the HIV travel ban into law.

Howard Mintz of the San Jose Mercury News explains the legal ironing still required to clear the way for same-sex marriages in California. Center stage is a 2010 circuit court ruling that tossed out Prop 8, the same-sex marriage ban:

Proposition 8 supporters maintain [that] former Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker's 2010 ruling only applies at most to two counties, Alameda and Los Angeles, despite the fact he blocked state officials from enforcing Proposition 8 at the time. Andrew Pugno, ProtectMarriage.com's chief lawyer, vowed to try to limit the scope of Walker's ruling when the case returns to the lower court, but the group is still "reviewing all of its legal options."

Read the full piece here. Separately the Associated Press reports that the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said Wednesday that it will take at least 25 days for the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling to become official:

The San Francisco-based court said it may continue to bar gay marriages even beyond that if proponents of Proposition 8, the state's gay marriage ban, ask for a rehearing.

Tireless marriage equality advocate Andrew Sullivan celebrates the day with a drink at Stonewall (photo). Cheers.

(via @citizencohn)

Sahil Kapur of TPM contributes a new reading of Justice Antonin Scalia's dissent in the Doma case (earlier we linked to Mother Jones' take). 

Scalia's opinion proves sufficiently rich of rhetoric and emotion to support multiple reviews. Kapur picks the top 10 quotes. Number 4, featuring the phrase "legalistic argle-bargle," is pretty good:

Referring to the issue of standing, Scalia wrote, “I find it wryly amusing that the majority seeks to dismiss the requirement of party-adverseness as nothing more than a ‘prudential’ aspect of the sole Article III requirement of standing.”

“As I have said, the real rationale of today’s opinion, whatever disappearing trail of its legalistic argle-bargle one chooses to follow, is that DOMA is motivated by ‘bare … desire to harm’ couples in same-sex marriages.”

Read all 10 here.

ABC News gets to talk with Edith Windsor:

The supreme court's decisions were met with relief and
elation in San Francisco, reports Eoin Reynolds for the Guardian:

Thousands thronged City Hall, where gay marriage licenses were first issued, against state law, by former mayor Gavin
Newsom in 2004. Many who had married during that brief window gathered in solidarity with others who were denied the same right when Proposition 8 was voted into law in 2008.

As news of the decision on Doma and later on Prop 8 circulated, the surprisingly subdued crowd applauded. The biggest cheer was reserved for Newsom, who was followed closely by many of the city's elected officials, including the current mayor Ed Lee. "This is a historic day for all of us," said Lee. "We have struggled for many, many years. I want to thank all of you for sharing this moment. Gosh, it feels good to have love triumph over ignorance, equality triumph over discrimination."

In the Castro district, people gathered at Harvey Milk Plaza for a lively morning celebration. "America is finally moving forward," said Jane Fand, holding a banner that read simply: "I do". She added: "This is about equality and nothing more. The people who don't want gay marriage want America to uphold discrimination and to foster hate. That's not the American way."

Today the celebrations are continuing with a church service of religious leaders who support gay marriage to be held in the city's Grace Cathedral at 2.30pm PT. Later this evening the Castro, a longtime center for gay life in the city, will be closed down to traffic for a street party. The ruling has come just in time for San Francisco's Gay Pride festival, which kicks off this weekend.

House minority leader Nancy Pelosi has an opinion about outgoing Rep. Michele Bachmann's opinion about the death of Doma: "Who cares?"

Members of Congress sad to see Doma fall have held a news conference on Capitol Hill, watched by my colleague Dominic Rushe. There was talk of a "holy quintet":

Congressman Louie Gohmert said: "It is a sad day. Some may try to brand us hateful, this is not a hateful group,” he said.

He attacked the Supreme Court judges who had voted for the abolition of DOMA and Prop 8.

“What we now have today is a holy quintet who goes against the laws of nature and nature’s God and that’s very unfortunate.”

Michelle Bachmann said the decisions were "offensive on so many levels". "We are becoming a nation that our founders would no longer recognize," she said.

More scenes of celebration:

Guardian national security editor Spencer Ackerman flags a Pentagon statement with more details on how the department will adapt to meet the new law of the land: "The Supreme Court's ruling means that the Defense Department will extend all benefits to same-sex spouses of military personnel that are currently extended to opposite-sex spouses:

The Department will immediately begin to update the identification card issuance infrastructure and update the applicable implementing guidance. We estimate that this process will take about 6-12 weeks. For civilian employees, the Department will look to OPM for guidance. For civilian employees who are eligible for ID card-related benefits, the Department intends that ID cards will be made available to same-sex spouses of civilian employees at the same-time as same-sex spouses of military members.

"The Supreme Court's ruling means that the Defense Department will extend all benefits to same-sex spouses of military personnel that are currently extended to opposite-sex spouses, including medical, dental, interment at Arlington National Cemetery, and with-dependent Basic Allowance for Housing. The Department will implement these benefit changes as soon as possible for same-sex spouses.

"The policies governing burial at Arlington National Cemetery will apply equally to same-sex and opposite-sex spouses.

"We are carefully reviewing command sponsorship for overseas tours, and all applicable Status of Forces agreements.

"We will assess costs as we move forward with implementation.

 "The Department is reviewing the opinion of the Supreme Court carefully, in consultation with the Department of Justice."

Just yesterday defense secretary Hagel became the first sitting defense secretary to attend the Pentagon Pride event.

“Our nation has always benefited from the service of gay and lesbian soldiers, sailors, airmen, and coast guardsmen, and Marines,” Hagel said at the event at the Pentagon Tuesday. “Now they can serve openly, with full honor, integrity and respect. This makes our military and our nation stronger, much stronger.”

The governor of California, Jerry Brown, has directed county clerks to start issuing marriage licences to same-sex couples as soon as a federal appeals court lifts the ban on same-sex marriage in the state. The LA TImes reports that the process will likely take around 30 days.

The temporary ban is expected to be lifted now that the U.S. Supreme Court has upheld a lower-court ruling which held that Proposition 8, the voter-approved measure prohibiting gay marriage, is unconstitutional.

“I have directed the California Department of Public Health to advise the state’s counties that they must begin issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples in California as soon as the Ninth Circuit confirms the stay is lifted,” Brown said in a statement.

Guardian national security editor Spencer Ackerman passes along a statement on today's Doma decision by defense secretary Chuck Hagel, who says the Pentagon "welcomes the Supreme Court's decision today":

The Department will immediately begin the process of implementing the Supreme Court's decision in consultation with the Department of Justice and other executive branch agencies. The Department of Defense intends to make the same benefits available to all military spouses - regardless of sexual orientation - as soon as possible. That is now the law, and it is the right thing to do.

Every person who serves our nation in uniform stepped forward with courage and commitment. All that matters is their patriotism, their willingness to serve their country and their qualifications to do so. Today's ruling helps ensure that all men and women who serve this country can be treated fairly and equally, with the full dignity and respect they so richly deserve.

A post-noon summary of where things stand:

The supreme court found the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act to be "unconstitutional as a deprivation of the equal liberty of persons that is protected by the Fifth Amendment," in a 5-4 decision with Justice Kennedy writing for the majority. In a dissent read from the bench Justice Scalia said the court had overstepped its bounds.

The court declined to overturn a lower court ruling that struck down Prop. 8, California's law banning same-sex marriage. The court found the petitioner in the case did not have standing. The decision opened the way for same-sex couples to once again get married in California, but the decision does not affect marriage law in other states.

The defeat of Doma was widely hailed as a triumph for equal rights, by everyone from former President Bill Clinton, who signed Doma into law, to the current president, who placed a phone call to the successful plaintiffs as they basked in victory outside the court. There were celebrations.

Lawyer David Boies, who successfully argued the Prop 8 case, said the Doma decision meant that when state laws such as Prop 8 do come before the supreme court to be considered on their merits, they will likewise be found unconstitutional. "Marriage equality will be the law of the land," Boies said.

The successful plaintiff in the Doma case, Edith Windsor, 84, said the decisions open the way to a brighter future. "Children born today will grow up in a world without Doma and those same children who happen to be gay will be free to love and get married," Windsor said.

Eoin Reynolds reports for the Guardian from San Francisco, where celebration is in the air:

Thousands turned out at San Francisco's City Hall to celebrate the Supreme Court Decision. The city's former mayor, Gavin Newsom, was cheered and hugged, having been the man who sanctioned gay marriage back in 2004 only to see it reversed by Prop. 8.

John Lewis married his partner, Stuart Gaffney, before Prop 8 was voted into law. "After Prop 8 we were still married but no longer equal," Lewis said. "It put a stigma on all lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender couples by saying there is something second class about our love."

Twitter mentions of the supreme court decisions shot up to almost 9,200 per minute after the 10am announcement, Twitter data editor Simon Rogers (formerly of the Guardian) writes. The chart below also tracks mentions of Wendy Davis, the Texas state legislator who filibustered Tuesday night to block an anti-abortion bill:

Edie Windsor said she is "honored and humbled and overjoyed" by the court's decision, in an address at New York's LGBT Center, the Guardian's Amanda Holpuch reports:

"I'm honored and humbled and overjoyed," said Windsor, who turned 84 a few days ago.

"On a deeply personal I felt distressed and anguished that in the eyes of the government, the woman I had loved and cared for and spent my life with was not my legal spouse."

When Windsor learned Doma was struck down, she cried.

"To the justices of the Supreme Court, thank you for affirming the principles of equal justice under the law," Windsor said. "Finally to all of the gay people and all their supporters who have cheered them on, thank you, thank you, thank you. I'm sure Thea is thanking you too."

She was thrilled about the impact the court's decision would have for gay people in the future.

"Children born today will grow up in a world without Doma and those same children who happen to be gay will be free to love and get married," Windsor said.

"If I had to survive Thea, what a glorious way to do it - she would be so pleased."

The lead attorney who argued for Windsor's case before the Supreme Court, Roberta Kaplan, said Doma is "finally dead and gone and not a moment too soon."

"While I have thought long and hard about this moment the meaning of today's decision by the Supreme Court is truly overwhelming, even for me," she said.

Terry Moran of ABC News, who won the Merriman Smith award this year for his Supreme Court coverage, is taking questions on Facebook about today's decisions. Here's one:

Q: How will same sex couples be affected in states that do not acknowledge same sex marriage?

A: Good question. Right now, all state marriage laws remain in place, except California's Prop 8, which will fall. BUT today's DOMA ruling enshrines a huge principle in our law--the guarantee of equal protection applies to gay couples. It is just a matter of time, it seems, before all states will have to recognize that principle. --tm

Former president Bill Clinton, who signed Doma into law, and Hillary Clinton have issued a statement applauding the law's demise:

By overturning the Defense of Marriage Act, the Court recognized that discrimination towards any group holds us all back in our efforts to form a more perfect union. We are also encouraged that marriage equality may soon return to California. We applaud the hard work of the advocates who have fought so relentlessly for this day, and congratulate Edie Windsor on her historic victory.

House majority leader Eric Cantor has released a rather passive statement on the death of Doma:

The House defended this law, which passed with a large bipartisan coalition and was signed by President Clinton, because courts should determine the constitutionality of laws, not presidents. I'm disappointed in this decision, and the marriage debate will continue in the states.

(thanks to @KaylaEpstein)

The Honor Roll: The Boston Globe's Matt Viser links to the records of the 1996 Doma roll call votes in the House and in the Senate.

Sixty-seven representatives voted against Doma, as did 14 senators, listed below. Only three – Boxer, Feinstein, and Wyden – are still in the Senate, 17 years later:

Akaka (D-HI)
Boxer (D-CA)
Feingold (D-WI)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Inouye (D-HI)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Kerrey (D-NE)
Kerry (D-MA)
Moseley-Braun (D-IL)
Moynihan (D-NY)
Pell (D-RI)
Robb (D-VA)
Simon (D-IL)
Wyden (D-OR)

We quoted Michele Bachmann earlier.

The Wall Street Journal has reaction from marriage equality opponent Brian Brown, the president of the National Organization for Marriage:

“There is a stench coming from these cases that has now stained the Supreme Court. They’ve allowed corrupt politicians and judges to betray the voters, rewarding them for their betrayal,” Brown said in a statement.

The Guardian's Adam Gabbatt profiles Edith Windsor, the victor in the Doma case:

When the Guardian spoke to Windsor back in December, the day the the court agreed to hear her case, the joy in her voice was clear. She felt optimistic, too.

"I really believe in the supreme court. First of all, I'm the youngest in my family and justice matters a lot – the littlest one gets pushed around a lot. And I trust the supreme court, I trust the constitution – so I feel a certain confidence that we'll win."

It turns out she was right.

Read the full piece here.

Guardian Washington bureau chief Dan Roberts has a bit of reaction from outgoing Rep. Michele Bachmann:

On the day of its demise, does Doma know no defenders? Even the former congressman who wrote the act, Bob Barr of Georgia, will not speak up about the fall of his signature legislation, US News reports:

"We're not issuing any comment on this," Barr campaign manager Jeff Breedlove told U.S. News. "That's not going to change."

"Bob is focused on the issues affecting the constituents in the race for Congress looking forward, and he's just not issuing comment on this," said Breedlove.

Incidentally, Barr is currently running for Congress again. He served four terms before losing in 2002 elections.

(h/t: Erin McCann aka @mccanner)

90 minutes after the supreme court struck down the Defense of Marriage Act, Newt Gingrich, the former House speaker who shepherded the 1996 legislation to passage while conducting an affair with a House staffer who would become his third wife, sent this historic tweet:

Guardian Washington bureau chief Dan Roberts passes along a statement by the president on the supreme court's Doma decision.

"I applaud the decision," president Obama says in the statement. "This was discrimination enshrined in law":

It treated loving, committed gay and lesbian couples as a separate and lesser class of people. The Supreme Court has righted that wrong, and our country is better off for it. We are a people who declared that we are all created equal – and the love we commit to one another must be equal as well. [...]

So we welcome today’s decision, and I’ve directed the Attorney General to work with other members of my Cabinet to review all relevant federal statutes to ensure this decision, including its implications for Federal benefits and obligations, is implemented swiftly and smoothly.

Asawin Suebsaeng of Mother Jones has waded into the mud swamp of Justice Scalia's angry dissent in the Doma case and emerged with two big fistfuls of wriggling one-liners (or three-liners). Scalia writes:

That is jaw-dropping. It is an assertion of judicial supremacy over the people's Representatives in Congress and the Executive. It envisions a Supreme Court standing (or rather enthroned) at the apex of government, empowered to decide all constitutional questions, always and everywhere 'primary' in its role.

Read the full piece here. It is striking how Scalia's dissent today, with its central complaint that the court is poking its nose where it doesn't belong, echoes Justice Ginsberg's dissent yesterday in the Voting Rights Case. "“[T]he Court’s opinion can hardly be described as an exemplar of restrained and moderate decision making,” she wrote. “Quite the opposite. Hubris is a fit word for today’s demolition of the VRA.”

The Court makes no genuine attempt to engage with the massive legislative record that Congress assembled. Instead, it relies on increases in voter registration and turnout as if that were the whole story.

The Prop 8 plaintiffs have taken a call from the president of the United States congratulating them on the Supreme Court decision.

Plaintiff Jeff Zarillo has the president on "speaker" as the others gather round the iPhone Zarillo holds up.

Not a great moment for iPhone audio clarity when processed by MSNBC television microphones and broadcast nationally! You can't make out what the president is saying on speaker. It's clearly a message of congratulations.

"Thank you for your leadership" says Zarillo.

"You're invited to the wedding!" says his partner, Paul Katami.

The Obama administration threw its weight behind the challenges to Prop 8 and Doma two years ago.

The Guardian's Amanda Holpuch is in the lobby of New York City's LGBT Center, where people "exchanged hugs and high-fives" at the morning's news:

"Every day we see same-sex couples come through our doors, my friends, my family, people who just want to be recognized for the loving relationships they've nurtured, people with children who just want to be protected," said the center's executive director, Glennda Testino. "Today, the Supreme Court took a step to make sure it happens."

Edie Windsor is due to speak at the center at noon with her lawyers.

"I woke up this morning thinking of Edie," Testino said. "This was Edie's chance for her relationship to be recognized on a national, broad level."

Testino said that while thrilled with the Doma ruling, the LGBT community still must work to aid students who are bullied at schools, immigrants and transgender people.

The ACLU hails the fall of Doma:

"This historic ruling recognizes how unfair it is to treat married lesbian and gay couples as though they're legal strangers," said James Esseks, director of the ACLU's Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender Project. "Edie and Thea were there for each other in sickness and in health like any other married couple. It's only right for the federal government to recognize their marriage and the life they built together."

Thea Spyer is the late spouse of Edie Windsor, who challenged Doma after she had to pay $363,000 in estate taxes when Spyer died. Windsor would not have had to pay the estate tax if she had been married to a man.

The supreme court's rulings this morning have brought the law of the land in line with US public opinion, Guardian polling analyst Harry J. Enten writes:

The [Doma] ruling will be welcomed by most Americans. In poll after poll taken over the past few months, at least 60% of Americans have agreed that the federal government should recognize same-sex marriages in those states that allow it. This is significantly higher than the roughly 53% of Americans who believe same-sex marriage should be legalized everywhere.

The [Prop 8] ruling comports with the wishes of Californians. Over 55% of California voters want same-sex marriage to be legal versus the 48% who voted against Prop 8 in 2008.

Read the full piece here.

The New Yorker's Ariel Levy was with Edith Windsor in New York City when she found out Doma had been struck down. Levy snapped some pictures of an emotional Windsor with Roberta Kaplan, the lawyer who argued her case before the court. See it here.

Windsor is scheduled to make a public statement in about an hour.

Guardian US community coordinator Ruth Spencer puts out a call for your reactions: record yourselves, please:

As reaction to the ruling pours in from around the country, we want to hear (literally) from you. That's right – you've got 6 seconds to yelp, wail, scream, shout, giggle, laugh, cry or groan into your microphone and add express how you feel about today's SCOTUS ruling.

Got an air horn? Still hanging on to a vuvuzela from the World Cup? Now's your chance to use them again. The best sound bytes will be featured in a follow up reaction feature.

Ready? Grab your friends, gather around your mic and hit record on the Sound Cloud app below.

The Guardian's Jim Newell is outside the court. "It was not hard to determine what the ruling in Doma had been from outside the court," he writes:

As reporters sprinted from inside the chamber down the court steps to deliver notes to news organizations, a roar built up outside that lasted for about a minute.

Nearly everyone outside saw the same news on their cell phones, refreshing twitter constantly, with shouts of "Doma struck down!" emerging from all parts of the crowd. More updates continued. "On equal protection grounds!" "Kennedy!"

Then the wait began. "What's taking so long?"

"Scalia reading dissent."

"Ohhhhh."

"Scalia!"

You could not tell the Prop 8 decision from the crowd noise. It muffled as gatherers tried to determine what the more mixed news meant.

"Prop 8 struck down!"

"No standing."

"Meaning...?"

"Well...that's awesome news for California gay people?" someone said wryly to his partner, before returning to work.

One of the plaintiffs in the Prop 8 case, Kris Perry, says outside the court that the "importance of this case was to send a message to the children of this country":

The importance of this case was to send a message to the children of this country that you are just as good as everybody else, no matter who you love, no matter whom your parents love.

Boies says that while the court did not consider the Proposition 8 case on the merits, the court's finding in the Doma case means that when such a law as Proposition 8 is taken up by the court on its merits, "marriage equality will be the law of the land."

Boies also said the court's finding of no standing in the Prop 8 case is significant because the court threw out the argument that same-sex marriage somehow harms people outside the marriage.

They cannot point to anything that harms them because these two loving couples, and loving couples like them in the state of California, are now going to be able to get married.

Lawyer David Boies, who argued against Prop 8, is speaking outside the court:

"This is a great day for America," he says. "Today the US Supreme Court in two important decisions, brings us that much closer to true equality."

Today's plaintiff couples in the Prop 8 case, Sandy Stier and Kris Perry, and Paul Katami and Jeff Zarillo, have just walked down the steps of a Supreme Court in an emotional and triumphant scene. The couples raised their arms and waved, smiling, cheering.

A striking image we'll post as soon as we can.

Well that was a heckuva morning. Court adjourned.

Go Google Gay:

Edie Windsor, victorious, has announced a news conference to take place at noon ET.

There's some excitement in the air.

Bill Clinton, who signed Doma into law, yesterday tweeted his disappointment with the court's decision in the voting rights act case.

Will former president Clinton weigh in on the demise of the legislation? (He has already disowned Doma: "The law itself is discriminatory. It should be overturned.")

Here is the opinion finding no standing in the Prop 8 case, Hollingsworth v Perry, written by chief justice Roberts.

Held: Petitioners did not have standing to appeal the District Court’s order. [...]

Petitioners have no role—special or otherwise—in its enforcement. They therefore have no “personal stake” in defending its enforcement that is distinguishable from the general interest of every California citizen. 

Good news for California supporters of same-sex marriage: the supreme court won't touch a lower court finding that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional.

The effect of the supreme court's action – or inaction – is to restore same-sex marriage in California – without setting any precedent or making any rule that applies to marriage for other states.

In his dissent in the Doma case, chief justice John Roberts writes that the court has decided it lacks jurisdiction to rule on "state marriage definitions" in "the particular context" of the Prop 8 case, Hollingsworth v. Perry:

We may in the future have to resolve challenges to state marriage definitions affecting same-sex couples. That issue, however, is not before us in this case, and we hold today that we lack jurisdiction to consider it in the particular context of Hollingsworth v. Perry, ante, p. ___. I write only to highlight the limits of the majority’s holding and reasoning today, lest its opinion be taken to resolve not only a question that I believe is not properly before us— DOMA’s constitutionality—but also a question that all agree, and the Court explicitly acknowledges, is not at issue.

If the court declines to overturn the decision by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in California striking down Proposition 8, same-sex couples in the state would once again be able to marry under the law.

The Guardian's Jim Newell is outside the Supreme Court and sends this dispatch:

The plaza outside the supreme court is swarmed. Signs distributed from the human rights campaign, American foundation for equal rights, people for an American way, and other interests groups are held up in force. There's even a PETA sign calling for animal rights next.

The Brokaws, a couple from "a cornfield" in Michigan, are here with 23 students as part of a statewide political education group. The students were supposed to stay in Arlington for the day but wouldn't accept missing this.

"Kids nowadays don't have a problem with equal rights - with human rights," they say. "it's not an issue to them."

They're getting started early in the West Village:

As Justice Ginsberg did yesterday to signal forceful dissent to the court's ruling in the Voting Rights Act case, Justice Scalia today is reading a portion of his dissent from the bench. ScotusBlog catches snippets.

Scalia faults the logic by which the court found it had jurisdiction in the Doma case, and faults the majority decision.

"Both spring from the same diseased root: an exalted notion of the role of this court in American democratic society," Scalia says.

This a day after the court hollowed out one of Congress' most significant acts in history.

"DOMA is unconstitutional as a deprivation of the equal liberty of persons that is protected by the Fifth Amendment," Kennedy's opinion states.

The opinion uses plain language to mount a powerful defense of equality – and criticize the federal law:

The State’s decision to give this class of persons the right to marry conferred upon them a dignity and status of immense import. But the Federal Government uses the state-defined class for the opposite purpose—to impose restrictions and disabilities.

The court's opinion striking down Doma, written by Justice Kennedy, is here. Emphasis added:

DOMA’s history of enactment and its own text demonstrate that interference with the equal dignity of same-sex marriages, conferred by the States in the exercise of their sovereign power, was more than an incidental effect of the federal statute. It was its essence.

(h/t @chrisgeidner)

The US Supreme Court has ruled the Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional, ScotusBlog reports. Justice Kennedy writes the opinion for a 5-4 majority.

Decisions await:

There's an uncommon show of hope and enthusiasm today outside the court. The crowd should have its news soon.

A full transcript of Supreme Court arguments in March on Hollingsworth v Perry, the challenge to California's Proposition 8 banning same-sex marriage, is here.

The Guardian's Jim Newell summarized today's anti-Doma case back in March, when the cases were argued before the court. Doma opponents selected an 83-year-old New York woman named Edie Windsor as a test case to bring before the court. Read her story here. The basics:

The test case involves a couple from New York, Edith Windsor and Thea Spyer, who had been together for 42 years prior to their marriage in 2007. When Spyer died, however, the federal government, acting under DOMA, required Windsor to pay $363,000 in estate taxes that she would not have owed if her spouse had been of the opposite sex.

"If Thea had been Theo, I would not have had to pay those taxes," says Windsor. "It's just a terrible injustice and I don't expect that from my country. I think it's a mistake that has to get corrected."

At the Supreme Court on Wednesday, Windsor's lawyer, Roberta Kaplan, will tell the justices that the federal government, throughout the nation's history, has always deferred to state definitions of marriage, because regulating marriage is a state function. But because of DOMA, that traditional deference to the states doesn't exist for same-sex couples. Edie Windsor's marriage, recognized as legally valid by the state of New York, is not recognized by the federal government.

"Critics of same-sex marriage have had their straw arguments debunked repeatedly," Comment is Free assistant editor Heather Long wrote last week in anticipation of the supreme court rulings:

They tried to assert that allowing homosexuals to marry would somehow ruin marriages. In fact, states that acted early to allow marriage equality actually have lower divorce rates. Lately, American conservative groups – and the lawyers trying to defend Prop 8 before the supreme court – have taken to asserting that gay and lesbian couples can't procreate and therefore aren't good parents. In reality, alarge-scale study from the University of Melbourne published earlier this month finds that children in same-sex couple households are doing as well as, if not better than their straight-parented peers on a range of indicators, from health to family cohesion.

Regardless of how the supreme court justices rule, it is only a matter of time before this issue is rightly laid to rest both in law and in the court of public opinion. Americans now support gay marriage by 51% to 42%, according to the latest Pew Research poll, and that margin is only going in one direction.

Heather notes the "unprecedented shift from the situation only a decade ago, when a majority of Americans held homosexuality a sin, let alone [endorsed] the idea of gay unions." Read the full piece here.

Hello and welcome to our live blog coverage of the last day of the supreme court term, where opinions on the Defense of Marriage Act (Doma) and California's Proposition 8 are expected to come down.

When last we saw the court weighing these issues in March, the rough consensus coming out of oral arguments appeared to be a mixed bag for gay rights. 

A majority of justices were hostile in their questioning on Doma, specifically the part that bars same-sex couples from receiving federal benefits conferred on straight couples. Doma could well go down.

On Prop 8, however, a majority of the court seemed baffled as to why they were even hearing the case and not in the mood to pronounce any sweeping judgment finding a right to same-sex marriage nationwide. The court is more likely either to overturn or uphold the lower court's decision to strike down Prop 8 – the California constitutional ban on same-sex marriage – and leave it at that.

We'll see.