Legal Filings
CREW: Ethics Loopholes Created by DOMA Make Law Unconstitutional
Washington, D.C. – Today CREW filed a friend-of-the-court brief in a lawsuit before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit challenging the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), Commonwealth of Mass. v. U.S. Dep’t of Health & Human Serv. CREW’s brief, written with the assistance of George Washington University Law School Professor Alan Morrison, points out how DOMA’s exclusion of married same-sex couples from the terms “marriage” and “spouse” undermines a host of ethics and other statutes designed to bring transparency and accountability to the government. Click here to read CREW’s brief.
“In its zeal to discriminate against same-sex couples, Congress passed a blatantly unconstitutional law without stopping to consider DOMA’s impact on other important laws, such as those governing ethics,” said CREW Executive Director Melanie Sloan.
Current anti-nepotism laws impose bans on hiring or appointing spouses for government positions, but thanks to DOMA, do not apply to same-sex married couples. As a result, an agency head could hire his or her same-sex spouse despite the obvious conflict of interest. Similarly, financial disclosure obligations imposed by the Ethics in Government Act and other statutes do not apply to same-sex spouses. These consequences highlight the fundamental problems with this irrational and over-broad legislation.
CREW also pointed out that while Congress justified DOMA as purportedly money-saving legislation, a report prepared by the Congressional Budget Office estimates DOMA costs taxpayers almost $1 billion per year.
“DOMA should be struck down for its discriminatory impact alone, but by pointing out its far-reaching, unintended consequences, CREW hopes to demonstrate how irrational it really is,” said Ms. Sloan.
Click here to read CREW's amicus brief.
Click here to read the Congressional Budget Office's DOMA analysis.

