Windsor the U.S. government could not deny federal benefits to married same-sex couples, other parts of DOMA were still active, including Section 2, which declared that states and territories could refuse to recognize the marriage of same-sex couples from other states (DOMA will be declared unconstitutional by …

The opinions of Roberts and Scalia offered different interpretations of the majority ruling. Roberts said the majority opinion was based on federalism, finding DOMA unconstitutional because the federal government was interfering with state control of marriage.

On June 26, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that section three of the so-called “Defense of Marriage Act” (DOMA) is unconstitutional and that the federal government cannot discriminate against married lesbian and gay couples for the purposes of determining federal benefits and protections.

On June 26, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court held in a 5–4 decision that the Fourteenth Amendment requires all states to grant same-sex marriages and recognize same-sex marriages granted in other states.

Typically, the Court hears cases that have been decided in either an appropriate U.S. Court of Appeals or the highest Court in a given state (if the state court decided a Constitutional issue). The Supreme Court has its own set of rules. According to these rules, four of the nine Justices must vote to accept a case.

The case was named after plaintiff Jim Obergefell, who sued the state of Ohio after officials refused to recognize his marriage on the death certificate of his husband. Same-sex marriages were performed in Ohio beginning shortly after the Supreme Court released its ruling, as local officials implemented the order.

The court held that DOMA “because of its reach and extent, departs from this history and tradition of reliance on state law to define marriage.” DOMA’s “demonstrated purpose is to ensure that if any State decides to recognize same-sex marriages, those unions will be treated as second-class marriages for purposes of federal law,” the majority ruled.

During the Obama administration, the Justice Department initially defended DOMA in court despite the administration’s desire to repeal it. But the Justice Department changed course in early 2011, finding that the law was unconstitutional and declining to defend it any longer.

On Wednesday, the court’s majority ruled that the power of the individual state in defining marriage “is of central relevance” and the decision to grant same-sex couples the right to marry is “of immense import.”