A U.S. district judge in Massachusetts decided in two separate cases that the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act signed into law by Bill Clinton encroaches on the states’ right to regulate marriage and violates the equal protection clause of the Constitution.
AP via Google (emphasis added):
“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,” [U.S. District Judge] Tauro wrote.
[...] Andrea Lafferty, executive director of the Traditional Values Coalition, called Tauro’s ruling “judicial activism” and said Tauro was a “rogue judge.” Gay marriage advocates will keep pushing their agenda in the courts, she said, but noted voters often reject gay marriage at the ballot box, including in a recent California vote.
“We can’t allow the lowest common denominator states, like Massachusetts, to set standards for the country,” Lafferty said.