Valley News (White River Junction, Vermont)

July 11, 2009 Saturday Daily Edition

Leahy Reverses on U.S. Marriage Act

BYLINE: John P Gregg, Valley News Staff Writer

SECTION: LOCAL/REGION; Pg. A1

LENGTH: 847 words

White River Junction -- U.S. Sen. Patrick Leahy,  the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, this week said he favors repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act, the federal anti-gay marriage law that he supported in 1996.

"I'd vote to repeal it. It's served its purpose," Leahy, a Vermont Democrat, said in an interview Thursday with WTSA-FM radio in Brattleboro, Vt. "Some states will not allow same-sex marriages, but for those that have, like Massachusetts and Vermont, and others now, they should be allowed to give full benefits to the couples."

The 69-year-old Leahy stayed mum this spring as the Vermont Legislature narrowly voted to legalize gay marriage, with his spokesman saying at the time that he did not want to intrude on the legislative process in Montpelier.

Leahy has supported other efforts to grant some protections for gay couples at the federal level, and has previously suggested that his vote for DOMA also was intended, in part, to ward off more Draconian action -- a constitutional amendment at the federal level banning gay marriage.

Yesterday, Leahy spokesman David Carle said the senator "supports Vermont's law" and full repeal of DOMA.

Leahy, who is running for re-election in 2010, was attending three events celebrating the 400th anniversary of the European discovery of Lake Champlain by French explorer Samuel de Champlain and was not available for comment yesterday.

He'll be in the national spotlight next week as chairman of the confirmation hearings for Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor.

U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., and U.S. Reps. Peter Welch, D- Vt., and Paul Hodes, D-N.H., have previously voiced support for gay marriage laws passed this spring in both Montpelier and Concord. U.S. Sen. Judd Gregg, R-N.H. is a gay marriage opponent and voted for DOMA in 1996.

DOMA, which was signed by then-President Clinton, defined marriage as the legal union of a man and woman only, and also said states were not required to recognize a same-sex marriage from another state. One of its major effects is to prevent the extension of federal benefits to married gay couples who live in states that recognize their unions.

The Boston-based Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders sued earlier this year on behalf of several same-sex couples and three surviving spouses who have been denied some federal benefits because of DOMA.

And earlier this week, Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley sued the federal government over DOMA, saying it denied married gay couples in Massachusetts "equal treatment under the law."President Obama  has also said he supports legislative repeal of DOMA.

Gary Buseck, the legal director for GLAD, said the shift by Leahy, who has sought to provide other protections for gay couples, is noteworthy.

"If he is now stating that he agrees with the president that DOMA should be repealed, he's an important player in that process," Buseck said. "There needs for momentum to be built for Congress to take on the project of getting DOMA repealed."

Corinth resident Linda Weiss, who is planning to marry her civil union partner, Joyce McKeeman, on Sept. 1 when Vermont's law takes effect, said repeal of DOMA would help her obtain health insurance through McKeeman's U.S. Postal Service health plan once they are married.

"I'm delighted to hear that he has taken a public stand in favor of repeal," said Weiss, the secretary of the Vermont Democratic Party. "I am hopeful that Sen. Leahy will be using his seniority and his influence to actively work toward the creation of a bill to repeal DOMA."

But with many states opposed to gay marriage -- more than half have passed constitutional amendments at the state level that restrict marriage to one man and one woman -- some officials said court cases may prove more significant than legislative efforts to repeal DOMA.

"New Hampshire and Vermont are a long way from Wyoming, literally and figuratively," said Vermont Attorney General William Sorrell, an early supporter of gay marriage. "I wouldn't hold my breath expecting it to happen ... in today's political climate, a court challenge holds at least as much promise as a Congressional repeal."

Sorrell said Vermont is not immediately signing onto the Massachusetts case in part because the two states are in different federal circuits, and in part because Vermont's law has yet to take effect.

"We'll see what develops in Vermont after September first," Sorrell said. "For now we are going to watch the Massachusetts case and consider, depending on how the case evolves, weighing in (at the appeals court level) if and when the case is there."

Colin Manning, a spokesman for New Hampshire Gov. John Lynch, also indicated that DOMA was problematic now that gay marriage has been legalized in the Granite State.

"Unfortunately, the federal government does not extend the same rights and protections that New Hampshire provides same-sex families, and that should change," Manning said in an e-mail. "As for the Massachusetts lawsuit, we have not reviewed the litigation."