Kathleen A. Murphy (62) and her spouse were married in Massachusetts, however, she became a widow when her wife passed away in 2012 from cancer. Last year, Ms. Murphy applied for the typical benefits any married couple receives after the death of a spouse, but because it was a same-sex marriage, Ms. Murphy was denied the rights to these benefits by the state of Texas.
After doing some research on the Social Security Administration's website, I found that Ms. Murphy was eligible for a $225 dollar lump-sum for her wife's death, and because she was over 60 but under full retirement age she was eligible to receive 71-99% of "the workers basic benefit amount" (Social Security Administration Handbook). Also, check out the original article (link at the top), for an accurate graphic of nationwide recognition of same-sex marriages.
Joining Ms. Murphy in the lawsuit as a plaintiff is the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare. The committee came out with a statement defending Ms. Murphy, saying that the laws in the state of Texas give the idea that "valid [same-sex] marriages are unworthy of federal recognition and equal treatment".
Questions:
Do you think Texas is being unfair in it's decision to deny benefits, or do you think the law is justified?
Do you think Ms. Murphy will win her case or will the law be ruled constitutional? Why?
4 comments:
Unless it was listed in the article and I simply missed it, I would be interested to know whether the couple were given the tax breaks that usually accompany a marriage while living in Texas. I would assume not, because the argument the opposition is making is that since Texas does not recognize same-sex marriage there is no obligation to provide the survivor benefits. If that is indeed the case, has the couple sued for something along those lines before? Or why has the widow only spoken up now about the denial?
Unfortunately, I do think that the court will rule that the law is constitutional because marriage goes by a state by state basis, and it is indeed up to each state to determine whether or not they recognize same sex marriages, as well as the fact that each state is very clear on what their policy is. This seems to be a case that's popping up is various places around the country so I'm very interested to see what the Supreme Court has to say about this.
In an ideal world, all same-sex marriages would be recognized by every state so nobody has to deal with what Murhpy is dealing with. However, this is not the case and she has run into several issues regarding her rigth as a spouse. I have to agree with Miranda and say that she will lose the court case. Since the state issues the marriage license, this is a state by state thing. Unfortunately, it seems like Texas doesn not have to do anything to honor the marraige. Therefore, I don't think Texas is being unfair in their decision because the state does not decalre same-sex marriages as legal. Even though this decision is unfair, it sparks more conversation on the issue of same-sex marriage. I have never really thought about a situation such as this so it will be interesting to see how it plays out in the future.
While I agree with Miranda and Emma that the court will rule Texas' decision constitutional because of the current SSA guidelines of the residency of the couple to receive benefits; however, I hope that the Department of Justice achieves their goal in changing this rule. I think, like many, that it is incredibly unjust to reject benefits to any widow or widower on account of marriage status. While I understand the constraints the SSA is under to follow state law, I do not believe that the state has the right to take away rights such as these to any spouse. Similar controversy has come up in the military as same-sex couples have argued for benefits, and post-DOMA legislation dictates that any spouse will receive military benefits even if they reside in a state that does not recognize same-sex marriage. I am interested to see if the SSA guidelines will follow this path in any way in the future in response to this recent example of Kathleen Murphy.
It is extremely unlikely that Ms. Murphy will win such a case, really. It would be a happy miracle if she does! When this case will be reviewed by the Supreme Court, ultimately, it may result in a progressive change for acceptance of gay marriage, even if Murphy does not win. Either way, there most likely are other widows of a same-gender marriage who face the same situation as Murphy. If Murphy loses this case, there will be further attempts with time. This case will be one small half-step in the road for legal same-sex marriage in every state, as more and more people are willing to talk about and accept gay marriage and LGBTQ rights.
Post a Comment