EQUAL-PROTECTION AFTER ROMER V. EVANS - IMPLICATIONS FOR THE DEFENSE OF MARRIAGE ACT AND OTHER LAWS

Recent national events have forced the American public to discuss a su bject once considered unthinkable-same-sex marriage. In 1996, the Hawa ii Supreme Court decided Baehr v. Lewin, potentially paving the way to allow same-sex couples the right to legally marry in the state of Haw aii. In response to this possibility, Congress passed and the Presiden t signed the Defense of Marriage Act, which defines marriage in the U. S. Code in such a way as to deny federal recognition to these couples, and also grants the states the right to refuse to recognize same-sex marriages performed in Hawaii. Addressing a totally different issue, t he U.S. Supreme Court in Romer v. Evans decided that it violates the F ourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause when the government enac ts a law, based on ''animus'' or prejudice, which disadvantages gays a nd lesbians. This Note addresses the convergence of these events and m akes some predictions about the future. After a brief overview of equa l protection doctrine and cases addressing same-sex marriage, the auth or addresses the impact of Romer v. Evans on equal protection in gener al. Next, the author examines the part of the Defense of Marriage Act which bars same-sex couples from receiving federal rights and benefits , and argues that because this provision was based on irrational preju dice, it is an example of a law that is unconstitutional under the pri nciples of Romer v. Evans. Finally, the author creates a framework tha t courts could use to examine laws that discriminate against gays and lesbians, and discusses Romer's implications for these laws.