A Gay Lawyer's Brief Take on DOMA and Proposition 8

http://www.forbes.com/sites/deborahljacobs/2013/06/27/after-the-doma-ruling-faqs-about-the-rights-of-same-sex-couples/

Before the DOMA and Proposition 8 ruling of the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS), a good friend once asked me if I thought that same sex marriages would ever be recognized legally here in the Philippines. I had no doubt with my answer, “Not in this lifetime.” Regardless of how Philippine society has already matured and moved on from its conservative roots, the Church still has a strong hold on the laws passed by Congress. My friend then retorted, “Sa bagay, kung ang divorce nga ng legal couples, hindi ma-pass eh, ang same sex marriage pa kaya.” (“It makes sense since if divorce laws for legal couples cannot be passed, what more same sex marriages.”)

I then replied that realistically speaking, if same sex marriages cannot be legalized, what I truly hope for in this country is the passing of laws governing same sex unions. Under the Family Code, property relations between a man and a wife who are “living in” are provided for. Property relations between same sex couples, however, are not, since they are considered void ab initio and can never ripen into validity for being against public morals. At the very least, I hope that laws are passed giving same sex unions some rights as regards property and inheritance if they meet certain standards that would make them pass as “ordinary” couples.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/26/supreme-court-doma-prop-8-rulings

This is the reason why I, together with the entire LGBT community, was elated with the decision of the SCOTUS in United States v. Windsor which struck down a provision in the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) that denies federal benefits to legally married same-sex couples such as Social Security benefits. The decision, penned by Justice Anthony Kennedy, recognized the equal dignity of same sex marriages. The case was filed by Edie Windsor, an 83-year old lesbian who married her partner after living together for more than four decades. Upon the death of her partner, Windsor inherited her partner’s estate but was charged with a huge amount of estate taxes since the then prevailing DOMA did not recognize her as the legal spouse. The victory of Windsor in the SCOTUS signified not only the return of the taxes she had paid, but a victory of the world-wide LGBT community, especially those affected and living in the U.S.

With the Windsor decision, the SCOTUS likewise ruled on the unconstitutionality of Proposition 8 (the State of California’s ban on same-sex marriages) albeit based on a mere technicality. Hollingsworth v. Perry was dismissed on the ground that the defendants did not have legal standing in court. Being mere private individuals who were not defended by public officials, i.e. the attorney-general , the defendants were deemed to have no capacity to sue in support of Proposition 8. The Hollingsworth decision does not have as much impact as the Windsor decision, since the SCOTUS in the former case did not dwell on its substantial issues. However, the result is something the LGBT community can be happy about since it, in effect, reinstated a lower court’s decision which ruled that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional.

http://management.fortune.cnn.com/2013/06/27/gay-marriage-immigration/

The Windsor and Hollingsworth cases may not have a compelling effect in Philippine law. After all, our Civil Code (which includes the laws on family and property relations) was based on Spanish, and not American, laws. The Philippine Supreme Court rarely cites U.S. cases as legal basis for family courts cases; these are more common in commercial cases which involve the Corporation Code or transactional cases. However, given the strong influence which the U.S. has over Philippine culture, I am hopeful that this is the start of a paradigm shift which our country has against the LGBT community which would result in equality among all peoples – be they straight or otherwise.