Full opinion embedded at bottom of post.
Via ScotusBlog live blog:
10:02 Amy Howe: 5-4 per Kennedy. 10:02 Amy Howe: Roberts dissents. Scalia dissents. Equal protection. 10:02 Amy Howe: Alito dissents, joined by Thomas in part. 10:03 Amy Howe: DOMA is unconstitutional as a deprivation of the equal liberty of persons that is protected by the Fifth Amendment.10:03 Amy Howe: “DOMA singles out a class of persons deemed by a State entitled ot recognition and protection to enhance their own liberty.”10:05 Amy Howe: There is a “careful consideration” standard: In determining whether a law is motivated by improper animus or purpose, discriminations of an unusual character especially require careful consideration. DOMA cannot survive under these principles.That is page 20.10:08 Amy Howe: Bottom of 25-26: The federal statute is invalid, for no legitimate purpose overcomes the purpose and effect to disparage and injure those whom the State, by its marriage laws, sought to protect in personhood and dignity. By seeking to displace this protection and treating those persons as living in marriages less respected than others. An aside: This is vintage Kennedy.10:08 Amy Howe: The Chief agrees with Scalia that there is no jurisdiction. 10:21 Amy Howe: What this means, in plain terms, is that same-sex couples who are legally married will be entitled to equal treatment under federal law– with regard to, for example, income taxes and Social Security benefits.
CLICK HERE FOR FULL VERSION OF THIS STORY