District Court Allows Gay Couples to File Joint Returns

A federal law, called the Defense of Marriage Act of 1996, until now has barred same sex couples from filing joint federal income tax returns even where they are legally married under state law. However, a district court in Massachusetts has struck down the law on the grounds that the federal act violates the U.S. Constitution.

The case concerned a number of couples who tried to file joint tax returns. Joint filing status would have produced tax savings for them as compared with filing as singles or heads of households that the IRS instructions say they must use. After the IRS denied their filing status, they filed for refunds in a federal district court. The IRS argued that the federal government doesn’t recognize same sex marriages because of the Defense of Marriage Act.

The court now ruled that Congress’s reasons for enacting the law violate the Equal Protection clause of the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution; there is no rational basis for the law. When Congress enacted it, the reasons given for passage were to (1) encourage responsible procreation, (2) defend traditional marriage, (3) defend traditional morality, and (4) conserve limited resources. These reasons are not viewed by the court as furnishing a rational basis for a federal law, so the federal government should allow state law determination on marital status to govern marital status in all situations. Traditionally, each state had been able to set rules on marriage and the federal government respected those rules; the Defense of Marriage Act essentially trumped those rules.

Note: If this decision, which currently impacts only married gay couples in Massachusetts, is allowed to stand, the results could have widespread consequences beyond federal income taxes. According to the Government Accountability Office, more than 1,100 federal laws incorporate the Defense of Marriage Act (e.g., entitlement to spousal benefits under Social Security). In this case, in addition to joint filing status, the litigants are now entitled to a number of federal benefits that were previously denied to same-sex married couples, including various health benefits for eligible postal workers. The federal government may appeal the case.

Source: Nancy Gill et al., DC MA, July 8, 2010 (case found at http://pacer.mad.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/recentops.pl?filename=tauro/pdf/gill%20et%20al%20v%20opm%20et%20al%20sj%20memo.pdf)