Golinski v. Office of Personnel Management

rdf:langString Golinski v. Office of Personnel Management

rdf:langString Golinski v. Office of Personnel Management

rdf:langString v.

rdf:langString Defendants.

rdf:langString Plaintiff,

rdf:langString Office of Personnel Management, et al.,

rdf:langString Karen Golinski,

rdf:langString Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act does not substantially relate to an important government interest or rationally relate to a legitimate government end.

rdf:langString Golinski v. Office of Personnel Management, 824 F. Supp. 2d 968 (N.D. Cal. 2012), was a lawsuit filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. The plaintiff, Karen Golinski, challenged the constitutionality of section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which defined, for the purposes of federal law, marriage as being between one man and one woman, and spouse as a husband or wife of the opposite sex. On February 22, 2012, the District Court held section 3 unconstitutional. The case was appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The Department of Justice (DOJ), on July 3, 2012, asked the Supreme Court to take the case before the Ninth Circuit decided it, so it could be heard with two other DOMA-related cases, Gill v. Office of Personnel Management and Massachusetts v. United States Department of Health and Human Services. The Ninth Circuit delayed oral argument pending action by the Supreme Court. Following that Court's decision in United States v. Windsor, the appeal was dismissed on July 23, 2013.

rdf:langString * Gill v. Office of Personnel Management and

rdf:langString Massachusetts v. United States Department of Health and Human Services * United States v. Windsor * Pedersen v. Office of Personnel Management * Cardona v. Shinseki