Active Rebuttal Paper
By John Stidom
Business Communication and Critical Thinking
Instructor: Barbara Alston
04/25/2013

The job of the supreme court of the United States of America is to hear cases that deal with the threat of this nation’s security foreign affairs or bill of rights. I find that this issue of DOMA, though they may say is un constitutional, is a law that gives the rights to heterosexual couples the right to claim benefits of his or her love one due to death. This act came into existence due to issues with common law marriages. Common law marriages were causing an over flow of problems that were not legal and partners wanted to claim his or her common law spouse benefits and property. Families and common law spouses were fighting over these benefits. State court systems were overwhelmed with cases that held up court calendars. The repeal of the DOMA law could recant the issues that state courts encountered back in the early 80’s. Erikson’s approach to this issue lacks the credibility that the act was unconstitutional. Is this act un constructional or is it valid? This issue came as a result of two women that were partners in life for over 20 years and her death resulted in an enormous inheritance taxes by the IRS . The death of her lover, those not having the same last name, and the death tax act struck the nerve of some lobbyist on Capitol Hill to repeal DOMA. If the DOMA law is repeal, from the time of enactment to the repeal of the law, many common law spouses can re-file his or her case in court for a review of the ruling or a new decision on the case. This could cost companies millions or billions of dollars. Courts will face excessive man hours and money to rework or revisit these cases. A same sex marriage does not hold the value of the institution of marriage between a man and woman. There is a uniform policy in