Skip to main content

Gay marriage battle hinged on a great love story

By Roberta Kaplan
updated 3:08 PM EDT, Wed June 25, 2014
Edith (Edie) Windsor, on the right, holds hands with Thea Clara Spyer the day of their wedding, after 40 years together, on May 22, 2007. By then, Spyer was suffering from multiple sclerosis and could move only one finger. Edith (Edie) Windsor, on the right, holds hands with Thea Clara Spyer the day of their wedding, after 40 years together, on May 22, 2007. By then, Spyer was suffering from multiple sclerosis and could move only one finger.
HIDE CAPTION
Love through the years
Love through the years
Love through the years
Love through the years
Love through the years
Love through the years
Love through the years
<<
<
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
>
>>
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
  • A year ago Thursday, a Supreme Court ruling dismantled Defense of Marriage Act
  • Roberta Kaplan argued the case for Edie Windsor on behalf of same-sex marriage
  • Kaplan reminded herself "It's all about Edie, stupid," and Edie's 44-year relationship
  • Kaplan's amazed at how many states have used Windsor case to pass same-sex marriage

Editor's note: Roberta Kaplan, an attorney, successfully argued before the U.S. Supreme Court on behalf of Edie Windsor in her fight against DOMA. She is a lecturer at Columbia Law School. The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely hers. Watch Robbie Kaplan on "Legal View with Ashleigh Banfield," Thursday, June 26. The show airs live from noon to 1 p.m.

(CNN) -- Shortly after we filed our case challenging the Defense of Marriage Act, my client Edie Windsor was asked what it felt like to be a plaintiff suing the federal government. Edie, who grew up in a middle-class household after the Great Depression, said it was one thing to be "out" as a lesbian but another thing entirely to be the "out lesbian who happens to be suing the United States of America."

One year ago on Thursday, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Edie's case by issuing a landmark decision that gay people have have the same right to dignity and respect under the law that straight people do.

Roberta Kaplan
Roberta Kaplan

The so-called Defense of Marriage Act, also known as DOMA, was passed in 1996 and defined marriage as a union exclusively between a man and a woman. As a result, otherwise valid marriages of same-sex couples were rendered null and void under federal law and gay married couples were denied the full range of federal benefits that straight married couples received.

When we filed Edie's case in 2010, only five states and Washington, D.C., permitted same-sex couples to marry. When the Supreme Court's decision came down last year, 12 states and D.C. did. Today, 19 states and D.C. -- representing almost 44% of the U.S. population -- do. If you had told me last June that the world would look the way it does today for gay people, I would have said you need to be more realistic.

How did this happen? First and foremost, from the very beginning, our strategy was, to borrow a phrase from Bill Clinton's first presidential campaign, "It's all about Edie, stupid."

Unlike many previous LGBT civil rights cases, our case involved only one plaintiff. The trouble with cases involving multiple plaintiffs is that the plaintiffs' stories often got lost in the shuffle. After all, it's hard for a judge or jury to focus on several plaintiff couples at once.

It is much easier to focus only on one. And unfortunately, when the plaintiffs' stories get lost in the background, a gay civil rights case can sound more like a debate between Fox News and MSNBC than a case about real people and their lives.

Our view was that the best way to defeat DOMA was not to focus on lawyers or pundits, but instead to explain how DOMA harmed two real people, Edie Windsor, and her late spouse, Thea Spyer.

A brief history of gay marriage

So how did we do that?

We decided to tell the story of Edie and Thea's lives as the great love story that it was. Our goal wasn't to write a Harlequin romance. Rather, what we hoped to do was to show that Edie and Thea, who spent 44 years together in sickness and health till death did them part, lived their lives with the same decency and dignity as anyone else.

We demonstrated that Edie and Thea had what Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg called a "grand partnership," surely the kind of marriage any one of us -- straight or gay -- would be lucky to have. And the $363,000 federal estate tax bill that Edie received upon Thea's death solely because of DOMA didn't hurt either. If Edie had been married to a man -- if "Thea" had been "Theo" -- then her estate tax bill would have been zero.

Any American, gay or straight, Democrat or Republican, can understand how unfair it is to have to pay a huge tax bill simply because you are gay.

In our brief for the Supreme Court, we made three points to illustrate why the Supreme Court needed to be suspicious of Congress' motivation for passing DOMA.

First, DOMA was enacted because of moral disapproval of gay people who at the time were largely feared and misunderstood; second, DOMA essentially wrote gay people out of much of federal law; and third, by instructing the federal government to ignore the marriages of only gay people by denying them benefits, DOMA upset the historic relationship between the federal government and the states. The federal government had always otherwise deferred to the states' definitions of marriage.

Fortunately, these three themes are interwoven throughout the Supreme Court's opinion. On the moral disapproval point, Justice Anthony Kennedy explains that "interference with the equal dignity of same-sex marriages was more than an incidental effect of [DOMA]. It was its essence."

As for DOMA's scope, the Supreme Court notes that "DOMA writes inequality into the entire United States code" and describes DOMA as "touching many aspects of married and family life, from the mundane to the profound."

And on our third point, the Supreme Court points out DOMA's "unusual deviation" from the federal government's practice of recognizing otherwise lawful marriages. As the court concludes, DOMA was invalid because "no legitimate purpose overcomes the purpose and effect to disparage and to injure those whom the State, by its marriage laws, sought to protect in personhood and dignity." In other words, "by treating [gay people] as living in marriages less respected than others, [DOMA] is in violation of the Fifth Amendment."

The Supreme Court uses the word "dignity" 10 times in its 26-page opinion in United States v Windsor. Sometimes, it's the simplest and most obvious things that say the most. Dignity, the state of being worthy of honor or respect, is exactly what the Windsor case was all about.

Now that the Supreme Court has recognized that gay people and their relationships are equally worthy of respect under the Constitution, the legal equivalent of the Battle of Normandy in the struggle for gay rights has been won. And you don't have to take my word for it.

Twenty-five decisions throughout the country in states as far apart in geography and culture as Ohio and Utah, New Jersey and Oklahoma, Wisconsin and Arkansas, have relied on Windsor to extend rights to gay people. As of today, there's not a single case that has gone the other way.

It seems as though nearly every week, another court in another state expands the rights of gay people using the logic and language of the Windsor decision.

Although I have the greatest regard for the superhuman bravery and brilliance of the playwright and activist Larry Kramer, I have to respectfully disagree with his recent statement that "considering how many of us there are ... we have achieved very little." The truth is that no other minority group in American history has seen more progress toward equality more rapidly than gay people have.

I completely agree with Republican Sen. Orrin Hatch when he recently conceded that "anybody who does not believe that gay marriage is going to be the law of the land ... isn't living in the real world." But why is this so? What has changed? The answer isn't complicated.

It's because of the incredible courage of people such as Larry Kramer and Edie Windsor who came "out" and told the rest of the world "I'm here and I'm gay" that full equality for gay people under the law is about to become a reality.

Read CNNOpinion's new Flipboard magazine.

Follow us on Twitter @CNNOpinion.

Join us on Facebook.com/CNNOpinion.

ADVERTISEMENT
Part of complete coverage on
updated 1:33 AM EST, Thu December 25, 2014
Danny Cevallos says the legislature didn't have to get involved in regulating how people greet each other
updated 6:12 PM EST, Tue December 23, 2014
Marc Harrold suggests a way to move forward after the deaths of NYPD officers Wenjian Liu and Rafael Ramos.
updated 8:36 AM EST, Wed December 24, 2014
Simon Moya-Smith says Mah-hi-vist Goodblanket, who was killed by law enforcement officers, deserves justice.
updated 2:14 PM EST, Wed December 24, 2014
Val Lauder says that for 1,700 years, people have been debating when, and how, to celebrate Christmas
updated 3:27 PM EST, Tue December 23, 2014
Raphael Sperry says architects should change their ethics code to ban involvement in designing torture chambers
updated 10:35 PM EST, Tue December 23, 2014
Paul Callan says Sony is right to call for blocking the tweeting of private emails stolen by hackers
updated 7:57 AM EST, Tue December 23, 2014
As Christmas arrives, eyes turn naturally toward Bethlehem. But have we got our history of Christmas right? Jay Parini explores.
updated 11:29 PM EST, Mon December 22, 2014
The late Joe Cocker somehow found himself among the rock 'n' roll aristocracy who showed up in Woodstock to help administer a collective blessing upon a generation.
updated 4:15 PM EST, Tue December 23, 2014
History may not judge Obama kindly on Syria or even Iraq. But for a lame duck president, he seems to have quacking left to do, says Aaron Miller.
updated 1:11 PM EST, Tue December 23, 2014
Terrorism and WMD -- it's easy to understand why these consistently make the headlines. But small arms can be devastating too, says Rachel Stohl.
updated 1:08 PM EST, Mon December 22, 2014
Ever since "Bridge-gate" threatened to derail Chris Christie's chances for 2016, Jeb Bush has been hinting he might run. Julian Zelizer looks at why he could win.
updated 1:53 PM EST, Sat December 20, 2014
New York's decision to ban hydraulic fracturing was more about politics than good environmental policy, argues Jeremy Carl.
updated 3:19 PM EST, Sat December 20, 2014
On perhaps this year's most compelling drama, the credits have yet to roll. But we still need to learn some cyber lessons to protect America, suggest John McCain.
updated 5:39 PM EST, Mon December 22, 2014
Conservatives know easing the trade embargo with Cuba is good for America. They should just admit it, says Fareed Zakaria.
updated 8:12 PM EST, Fri December 19, 2014
We're a world away from Pakistan in geography, but not in sentiment, writes Donna Brazile.
updated 12:09 PM EST, Fri December 19, 2014
How about a world where we have murderers but no murders? The police still chase down criminals who commit murder, we have trials and justice is handed out...but no one dies.
updated 6:45 PM EST, Thu December 18, 2014
The U.S. must respond to North Korea's alleged hacking of Sony, says Christian Whiton. Failing to do so will only embolden it.
updated 4:34 PM EST, Fri December 19, 2014
President Obama has been flexing his executive muscles lately despite Democrat's losses, writes Gloria Borger
updated 2:51 PM EST, Thu December 18, 2014
Jeff Yang says the film industry's surrender will have lasting implications.
updated 4:13 PM EST, Thu December 18, 2014
Newt Gingrich: No one should underestimate the historic importance of the collapse of American defenses in the Sony Pictures attack.
updated 7:55 AM EST, Wed December 10, 2014
Dean Obeidallah asks how the genuine Stephen Colbert will do, compared to "Stephen Colbert"
updated 12:34 PM EST, Thu December 18, 2014
Some GOP politicians want drug tests for welfare recipients; Eric Liu says bailed-out execs should get equal treatment
updated 8:42 AM EST, Thu December 18, 2014
Louis Perez: Obama introduced a long-absent element of lucidity into U.S. policy on Cuba.
updated 12:40 PM EST, Tue December 16, 2014
The slaughter of more than 130 children by the Pakistani Taliban may prove as pivotal to Pakistan's security policy as the 9/11 attacks were for the U.S., says Peter Bergen.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT