Update Thursday Jun 13: We’re again monitoring the possibility today that the court will issue its rulings on Prop 8 and/or DOMA. See that post here.
Per SCOTUSblog, three opinions have been issued, none of which are Hollingsworth v. Perry (Prop 8) or United States v. Windsor (DOMA). That’s it for today. There’s a possibility the decisions could come on Thursday, though most court watchers think that’s unlikely, and that the opinions won’t be released until the last week of June.
There’s a chance the Supreme Court will release its Proposition 8 and/or Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) rulings today, around 7 a.m. If that’s the case, we’ll be live blogging right here.
If that’s not the case, we’ll head back to bed and keep an eye out on Thursday, the next day the court will be issuing opinions. Here’s a SCOTUSblog FAQ about how the court issues opinions. SCOTUSblog, the gold standard in high court watching, thinks the same-sex marriage opinions won’t be issued until the last week of June.
Prop 8, of course, is California’s same-sex marriage ban that was struck down on narrow grounds by the 9th U.S. Circuit of Appeals. Should SCOTUS uphold that decision, same-sex marriages could begin again in California within a month, according to San Francisco City Attorney Dennis Herrera’s office. (San Francisco was an intervenor in the case on the plaintiff’s side.) If the court uses the case to issue a more sweeping ruling that all same-sex marriage bans are illegal, that would effectively legalize same-sex marriage throughout the country.
DOMA is a 1996 federal law that defines marriage as only between a man and a woman. It prevents those who are in same-sex marriages from receiving a host of federal benefits, such as the ability to file a joint tax return. In the case before the court, a widow was forced to pay $363,000 in inheritance taxes after her female spouse died, a liability she would not have incurred if she’d been married to a man. A federal appeals court ruled that provision of DOMA was unconstitutional. Another provision, requiring states to recognize only opposite-sex marriages performed in other states, is not at issue here.