The Department of Veterans Affairs was sued in federal court Monday by LGBT-rights advocates seeking benefits for the same-sex spouses of veterans living in states that do not recognize their marriages.
Lambda Legal and the law firm of Morrison and Foerster filed suit against Secretary of Veterans Affairs Robert McDonald on behalf of the American Military Partner Association in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit arguing that to deny such benefits is in violation of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in the Windsor case.
“Having weathered the federal government’s past, longstanding discrimination against them, lesbian and gay veterans and their families find themselves once again deprived of equal rights and earned benefits by the government they served and the nation for which they sacrificed,” the lawsuit states.
One June 26, 2013, the same day the Supreme Court struck down Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act defining marriage for federal purposes as between a man and a woman, President Barack Obama instructed the Justice Department to work with members of his cabinet to ensure the decision was implemented swiftly and broadly across the federal government. In a June 20, 2014 memo to Obama, Attorney General Eric Holder announced the completion of the implementation of the Windsor decision. However, the Obama administration’s legal interpretation of the “place of domicile” rule prohibits the Department of Veterans Affairs, as well as the Social Security Administration, from adopting a place of celebration rule for certain programs and forces those agencies to instead confer benefits based on the laws of the state where a married same-sex couple lives. Due to those restrictions, both Holder and the White House renewed their call for Congress to pass legislation that would correct areas of federal law that continue to prevent the extension of benefits.
The Department of Veterans Affairs has argued that the following portion of U.S. Code forces them to look to the state where married same-sex couples currently live:
In determining whether or not a person is or was the spouse of a veteran, their marriage shall be proven as valid for the purposes of all laws administered by the Secretary according to the law of the place where the parties resided at the time of the marriage or the law of the place where the parties resided when the right to benefits accrued.
But according to the lawsuit filed Monday, the adoption of the place of domicile “imports into federal law unconstitutional state definitions of marital status,” many of which have been overturned by federal courts in the year since the Windsor decision. Federal courts have ruled in favor of marriage equality in Utah, Ohio, Oklahoma, Kentucky, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, Oregon, Wisconsin, Indiana and Colorado.
“The VA’s incorporation of state definitions of marital status that discriminate against same-sex couples to determine eligibility for federal spousal benefits is arbitrary, capricious, and contrary to law,” the lawsuit argues. “It violates the Fifth Amendment, including by impinging on the fundamental right to marry and by denying equal protection on the basis of sexual orientation and sex.”
Moreover, under the VA’s place of domicile rule the same-sex spouses of veterans can be “denied or disadvantaged in obtaining spousal veterans benefits such as disability compensation, death pension benefits, home loan guarantees, and rights to burial together in national cemeteries.”
Susan Sommer, director of Constitutional Litigation at Lambda Legal, said in a statement, “Married veterans and their spouses, wherever they live, need critical veterans benefits, earned through years of often perilous service, to take care of their families.”
“It is simply unacceptable to see AMPA’s members not only discriminated against in their home states where their marriages are disrespected but also turned down by the federal government for basic veterans benefits for their spouses,” added Stephen Peters, a Marine veteran and president of the American Military Partner Association. “Our members will be denied pension and survivors benefits, home loan guarantees, and other earned veterans benefits.”
A spokesperson for the Department of Veterans Affairs declined to comment on pending litigation.
With Obergefell at risk and 32 states poised to restrict same-sex marriage, LGBTQ advocates push to enshrine protections at the state level.
By Maximilian Sandefer
August 6, 2025
On June 22, 2022, the Supreme Court issued a landmark decision with Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization. Abortion rights were now no longer guaranteed nationwide as the issue was left up to the states. This shock reversal of over 49 years of precedent left reproductive rights activists scrambling as anti-choice state laws stemming from as far back as 1864 were revived and reinstituted.
As people's ability to access to reproductive care dwindled in conservative-led states, activists also found their footing. The 2024 election saw abortion rights ballot measures win in seven out of ten states. As we navigate a landscape where it will likely be a long time before we see any form of successful federal legislation protecting a woman's right to choose, state-by-state activism seems to be the driving force behind change.
A new Pew Research Center survey finds that 59% of LGBTQ U.S. adults under age 50 who have never been married say they want to marry someday -- nearly the same as the 63% of non-LGBTQ adults who do. About 12% of each group say they never want to marry, while more than one-quarter are unsure of their future marriage plans.
By age, younger Americans who have never been married are more eager to wed than older peers, who are less certain and more doubtful about ever marrying.
Among those aged 18 to 29 who have never married, 67% of LGBTQ adults and 73% of non-LGBTQ adults say they want to marry someday. By contrast, just 48% of LGBTQ adults and 49% of non-LGBTQ adults aged 30 to 49 say the same, with nearly one-third in each group unsure.
Conservative Christians are absolutely outraged over casting a same-sex couple among families featured in the new reality show Back to the Frontier.
Premiering last week on Magnolia Network -- co-founded by HGTV stars Chip and Joanna Gaines in partnership with Warner Bros. -- the show is a social experiment that sends families to live like 1800s-era pioneers. Among them is Texas couple Jason and Joe Hanna-Riggs and their 10-year-old twin sons.
The Gaineses, executive producers of the show, have been open about their Christian faith. They own Magnolia Homes and rose to fame on the home renovation show Fixer Upper. They faced criticism for not including same-sex couples among their clients whose properties they remodeled as part of the show.
These are challenging times for news organizations. And yet it’s crucial we stay active and provide vital resources and information to both our local readers and the world. So won’t you please take a moment and consider supporting Metro Weekly with a membership? For as little as $5 a month, you can help ensure Metro Weekly magazine and MetroWeekly.com remain free, viable resources as we provide the best, most diverse, culturally-resonant LGBTQ coverage in both the D.C. region and around the world. Memberships come with exclusive perks and discounts, your own personal digital delivery of each week’s magazine (and an archive), access to our Member's Lounge when it launches this fall, and exclusive members-only items like Metro Weekly Membership Mugs and Tote Bags! Check out all our membership levels here and please join us today!
You must be logged in to post a comment.