The Washington Post ruled that it is unconstitutional to discriminate against gays...in a sense. "Congress undertook this classification for the one purpose that lies entirely outside of legislative bounds, to disadvantage a group of which it disapproves. And such a classification the Constitution clearly will not permit," Tauro wrote."

 

If this is holds against appeals, then things like pension survivorship, civil unions, and all that goes with it would need to be treated just like the guys that marry Thai women, I would assume. Since gays would not be excluded from Federal Law and all the benefits offered according to the article.

 

Would this mean my Thai Boyfriend, who has a US Passport good for 10 years and multiple entry, be able to get benefits?? I am not sure how marriage to a Thai women works as far as immigrating to the US, but it seems the same procedure would be followed

.

Federal Gay ban

The Washington Post ruled that it is unconstitutional to discriminate against gays...in

 

Would this mean my Thai Boyfriend, who has a US Passport good for 10 years and multiple entry, be able to get benefits?? I am not sure how marriage to a Thai women works as far as immigrating to the US, but it seems the same procedure would be followed

.

Federal Gay ban

 

Here is what I have found...

 

It appears logical that you must first be MARRIED

in a State which recognizes Gay Marriages...

 

Then...you must reside with your Married Partner 5 years in the USA

to be eligible for him to receive Social Security benefits..

 

from this website:

ACA American Citizens Abroad - Social Security and The Overseas American

 

5. Unfair Denial of Social Security Benefits to Certain Foreign Spouses and Adopted Children of U.S. Citizens

 

Foreign spouses of U.S. citizens must have been married to the U.S. citizen spouse and lived with the U.S. citizen spouse in the United States for five years to be eligible to receive dependency and survivor benefits.

 

 

 

tj

Jim,

You are a good researcher! For Americans living in Thailand the link is a good one also.

But there are other types of pensions beyond Social Security. State employees are an example who receive a pension that is not governed by SS rules.

 

If I understand the ruling, under this judges ruling "Congress undertook this classification for the one purpose that lies entirely outside of legislative bounds, to disadvantage a group of which it disapproves. And such a classification the Constitution clearly will not permit," Tauro wrote." it seems the word States could be substituted for Congress. And as we know (?) no State can make a law that .....

 

So maybe there is a ray of hope for our gay "husbands" or "wives".