pbs高端访谈:美国最高法院将废除只承认异性婚姻的“国防婚姻法”

 　　JUDY WOODRUFF:And we return to today's Supreme¹ Court arguments involving the federal Defense² of Marriage Act with a debate of our own.

　　Supporting the law is Ken³ Klukowski. He's the director of the Center for Religious Liberty at the Family Research Council and a Breitbart News legal columnist⁴. And Mary Bonauto opposes DOMA. She is special counsel for the group Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders⁵.

　　And welcome to the you both to the NewsHour.

　　1.jpg

　　KEN KLUKOWSKI, Center for Religious Liberty, Family Research Council: Thank you.

　　JUDY WOODRUFF:So, we were just saying before this conversation began there was some discussion at the court today about jurisdiction⁶, but we're going to set that aside and talk about the core of the argument today.

　　First of all, in the—Mary Bonauto, in the analysis I have been reading, there is—there are a number of folks who are concluding that there are enough votes now on the court to strike down DOMA. How did you read generally what you heard from the justices today?

　　MARY BONAUTO, Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders: Yes, I'm not prepared to make any predictions based on an oral argument.

　　But, clearly, the questions were going to two key issues. One is when the federal government has for so long deferred⁷ to a state's determination about who is married, why in 1996 did they change the rules when it looked like same-sex couples might begin to marry and impose a federal definition?

　　And then, secondly⁸, when you have all these protections that are available to married people, you know, why are you taking people from Massachusetts, Connecticut, Vermont, and saying their marriages don't count for Social Security and family medical leave and treating them like they're single, even though they're legally committed in marriage?

　　JUDY WOODRUFF:Well, let's talk about those two different streams of argument today, one, loosely, discrimination, the other one, loosely, the federal vs. the states.

　　And, Ken Klukowski, does one of those strands¹⁰ of argument have greater weight, did you think, today in what you heard?

　　KEN KLUKOWSKI:Well, the reality is that I think it's—looking at it from a different aspect, the reality is, DOMA—DOMA filled in the blanks—and there's a lot of blanks.

　　About 1,100 provisions of federal law reference marriage. But it wasn't the first one. Regarding, for example, filing taxes, if you're going to file a joint¹¹ married tax return, it's the tax code that specifies¹² that if you are married, but separated from your spouse—now, you're still legally married under the state, but it's illegal for you to file a married tax return. You must file an unmarried person tax return.

　　Also, if you are married to someone who is not a citizen and they're not in the country, you have to file a single tax return. There are aspects of immigration law. So, there are many areas of law going back decades where Congress has had the definition of marriage.

　　JUDY WOODRUFF:You're saying there is a legitimate¹³ role for the federal government, you're saying, in regulating these relationships?

　　KEN KLUKOWSKI:That's exactly right.

　　Who can get married is a state issue. But what federal benefits, mainly, usually entitlements, what federal benefits go to which sort of unions, that's a legitimate exercise of federal power, so long as it's one of Congress' powers in Article One, Section Eight of the Constitution.

　　JUDY WOODRUFF:And we heard Justice Kennedy today questioning that in particular, didn't we, the role of the federal government in overriding¹⁴ the states in determining how these laws are going to be interpreted.

　　MARY BONAUTO:We did.

　　And just to respond quickly, we have never had a situation where the Congress has wiped out a whole class of marriages for purposes of every federal law and program, and that's what DOMA is. In the context of any particular program, yes, there's play in the joints¹⁵, but there's never been a law that just said, oh, these people who were actually married by a state are not married for any federal purpose.

　　That's what is so different about DOMA, which gets into the equal protection issue. And then Justice Kennedy had another set of questions about, does the federal government even have the power to do this, not even from an equal protection standpoint, but isn't this something that solely¹⁶ belongs with the states?

　　JUDY WOODRUFF:And what about—and what's the answer to those questions—to that question?

　　KEN KLUKOWSKI:There are federal issues.

　　It's a great question. The federal government required several states, as a condition for becoming a state, that they must adopt the state standard that they wouldn't allow polygamy. The Supreme Court dealt with marriage other than one man and one woman in Reynolds v. United States in 1878, where they said there is no constitutional right to polygamy.

　　DOMA defines marriages for federal law purposes, only federal law. A state is free to create polygamy or same-sex marriage or anything. But the federal government recognizes one man and one woman also has an impact right now on current immigration efforts. It's something that spreads throughout the federal law.

　　And the reality is, federalism has two parts. States are sovereign where they are sovereign. But where the federal government is properly in the Constitution, the federal government gets to set its own rules.

　　JUDY WOODRUFF:What's the response to that?

　　MARY BONAUTO:There's a few responses to that.

　　On the polygamy thing, just to be really clear about the historical record, these were territories. And the territories, as a condition of statehood, had to agree to something. It has never been the case that the U.S. government has, again, invalidated a whole class of existing state-licensed marriages.

　　DOMA is an anomaly. And I don't think there was any disagreement about that on the court today, at least in terms of what one could hear about the questions.

　　JUDY WOODRUFF:Now, what—the other strand⁹ of this—and you touched on this, Mary Bonauto, a minute ago—and that is whether there is out-and-out discrimination here.

　　We heard that from Justice Sotomayor. We heard it from Justice Kagan. We heard her ask at one point that whether—she talked about moral disapproval¹⁷ of homosexuality. How did that play out in the court today and how important is that, Ken Klukowski, to deciding this case?

　　KEN KLUKOWSKI:Well, more important is that the Obama administration rejected it. They readily said in court, no, this was not—DOMA wasn't driven by animus¹⁸.

　　In fact, they said DOMA, if—what is called rational basis review, which is the federal law—federal standard under equal protection when we evaluate laws—the Obama solicitor¹⁹ general, Don Verrilli, who we just heard, said if rational basis review is the test, DOMA would survive. There are legitimate interests here. This law is rationally related to advancing them.

　　And this law, they said Congress made a mistake in passing it, but wasn't trying to discriminate²⁰.

　　JUDY WOODRUFF:So what role do you see discrimination playing in the outcome here?

　　MARY BONAUTO:I see it as playing a role.

　　This is not about naming—calling people names or anything else. But, in 1996, it was really clear that the law was, you take state marriage laws as you find them. You fold married people, whether they have differences in racial restriction²¹ in the past or first cousins, or second cousins, or how many marriages you can have—if you were married by your state, you got folded into that system for the federal government.

　　And they changed the rule to make sure that married same-sex couples wouldn't be included. That is the situation. So then the question becomes, well, is there a justification²² for making a new rule? And the justification that's been advanced by Mr. Clement²³ is really around this idea of uniformity, that it's important to treat all gay people alike.

　　But we have a system, when we're talking about federal marital²⁴ benefits and burdens, of treating married people. And we have now an anomaly where we're treating married gay people as though they're unmarried, as opposed to treating all married people alike, whether they're gay or non-gay. So, the uniformity thing just doesn't seem to make a lot of sense.

　　JUDY WOODRUFF:And how do you—how do you answer that?

　　KEN KLUKOWSKI:Well, I think there is a legitimate federal role here.

　　The reason I raise polygamy isn't to raise some far-off issue. Legislation is actually—I'm sorry—litigation has already started. Jonathan Turley, a professor at George Washington, is right now pursuing litigation in Utah, saying if there is a right to same-sex marriage, then there is a right to polygamy.

　　Now, and he's saying, I'm all for that. I don't think the government should discriminate on that base either. So, I think both sides here agree that there is a role for the government to draw lines. We're just debating where—where those lines are. And I think, as we understand the different combinations that could be involved, then people will understand what the Obama administration conceded in court and in their briefs today, that—that DOMA does serve legitimate interests and is reasonably related to it.

　　The Obama administration said the law will only be struck down if a court applies what's called heightened scrutiny²⁵ to this law.

　　JUDY WOODRUFF:You want to quickly respond?

　　And I want to just clarify with you both that you're both saying then—do I hear you saying that it's the federalism argument that's going to hold more weight here?

　　MARY BONAUTO:I think the equal protection argument is going to hold more weight ultimately.

　　And I say that because, even if you take the situation where—let's just even say, even though it's so far-fetched, that some state did authorize²⁶ multiple-person marriages, again, on equal protection, the question is, what are the government's interests here in saying we're not going to respect those marriages, where there's an acknowledged harm to women and subordination and so on?

　　There's a lot of reasons. The question in this case is, let's not change the topic. Let's say, what's the interest in saying that these committed couples who are joined in marriage by their states, many of whom are raising kids, should be cut out of the whole federal safety net?

　　JUDY WOODRUFF:A very quick response.

　　KEN KLUKOWSKI:The quick response is, in that one part, I agree with the Obama administration. And I would encourage people to look at their filings of what the legitimate interest is and why they agree that DOMA does in fact advance them.

　　JUDY WOODRUFF:Ken Klukowski, Mary Bonauto, we thank you both.

　　MARY BONAUTO:Thank you.

　　KEN KLUKOWSKI:Thank you, Judy.

1 supreme   

adj.极度的，最重要的；至高的，最高的

参考例句：

• It was the supreme moment in his life.那是他一生中最重要的时刻。
• He handed up the indictment to the supreme court.他把起诉书送交最高法院。

2 defense   

n.防御，保卫；[pl.]防务工事；辩护，答辩

参考例句：

• The accused has the right to defense.被告人有权获得辩护。
• The war has impacted the area with military and defense workers.战争使那个地区挤满了军队和防御工程人员。

3 ken   

n.视野，知识领域

参考例句：

• Such things are beyond my ken.我可不懂这些事。
• Abstract words are beyond the ken of children.抽象的言辞超出小孩所理解的范围.

4 columnist   

n.专栏作家

参考例句：

• The host was interviewing a local columnist.节目主持人正在同一位当地的专栏作家交谈。
• She's a columnist for USA Today.她是《今日美国报》的专栏作家。

5 defenders   

n.防御者( defender的名词复数 )；守卫者；保护者；辩护者

参考例句：

• The defenders were outnumbered and had to give in. 抵抗者寡不敌众，只能投降。 来自《简明英汉词典》
• After hard fighting,the defenders were still masters of the city. 守军经过奋战仍然控制着城市。 来自《简明英汉词典》

6 jurisdiction   

n.司法权，审判权，管辖权，控制权

参考例句：

• It doesn't lie within my jurisdiction to set you free.我无权将你释放。
• Changzhou is under the jurisdiction of Jiangsu Province.常州隶属江苏省。

7 deferred   

adj.延期的，缓召的v.拖延，延缓，推迟( defer的过去式和过去分词 )；服从某人的意愿，遵从

参考例句：

• The department deferred the decision for six months. 这个部门推迟了六个月才作决定。
• a tax-deferred savings plan 延税储蓄计划

8 secondly   

adv.第二，其次

参考例句：

• Secondly,use your own head and present your point of view.第二，动脑筋提出自己的见解。
• Secondly it is necessary to define the applied load.其次，需要确定所作用的载荷。

9 strand   

vt.使（船）搁浅，使（某人）困于（某地）

参考例句：

• She tucked a loose strand of hair behind her ears.她把一缕散发夹到了耳后。
• The climbers had been stranded by a storm.登山者被暴风雨困住了。

10 strands   

n.（线、绳、金属线、毛发等的）股( strand的名词复数 )；缕；海洋、湖或河的)岸；（观点、计划、故事等的）部份v.使滞留，使搁浅( strand的第三人称单数 )

参考例句：

• Twist a length of rope from strands of hemp. 用几股麻搓成了一段绳子。 来自《简明英汉词典》
• She laced strands into a braid. 她把几股线编织成一根穗带。 来自《简明英汉词典》

11 joint   

adj.联合的，共同的；n.关节，接合处；v.连接，贴合

参考例句：

• I had a bad fall,which put my shoulder out of joint.我重重地摔了一跤，肩膀脫臼了。
• We wrote a letter in joint names.我们联名写了封信。

12 specifies   

v.指定( specify的第三人称单数 )；详述；提出…的条件；使具有特性

参考例句：

• The third clause of the contract specifies steel sashes for the windows. 合同的第三款指定使用钢窗。 来自《简明英汉词典》
• The contract specifies red tiles, not slates, for the roof. 合同规定屋顶用红瓦，并非石板瓦。 来自《现代汉英综合大词典》

13 legitimate   

adj.合法的，合理的，合乎逻辑的；v.使合法

参考例句：

• Sickness is a legitimate reason for asking for leave.生病是请假的一个正当的理由。
• That's a perfectly legitimate fear.怀有这种恐惧完全在情理之中。

14 overriding   

a.最主要的

参考例句：

• Development is of overriding importance. 发展是硬道理
• My overriding concern is to raise the standards of state education. 我最关心的是提高国民教育水平。

15 joints   

接头( joint的名词复数 )； 关节； 公共场所（尤指价格低廉的饮食和娱乐场所） （非正式）； 一块烤肉 （英式英语）

参考例句：

• Expansion joints of various kinds are fitted on gas mains. 各种各样的伸缩接头被安装在煤气的总管道上了。
• Expansion joints of various kinds are fitted on steam pipes. 各种各样的伸缩接头被安装在蒸气管道上了。

16 solely   

adv.仅仅，唯一地

参考例句：

• Success should not be measured solely by educational achievement.成功与否不应只用学业成绩来衡量。
• The town depends almost solely on the tourist trade.这座城市几乎完全靠旅游业维持。

17 disapproval   

n.反对，不赞成

参考例句：

• The teacher made an outward show of disapproval.老师表面上表示不同意。
• They shouted their disapproval.他们喊叫表示反对。

18 animus   

n.恶意；意图

参考例句：

• They are full of animus towords us.他们对我们怀有敌意。
• When you have an animus against a person,you should give it up.当你对别人怀有敌意时，你应当放弃这种想法。

19 solicitor   

n.初级律师，事务律师

参考例句：

• The solicitor's advice gave me food for thought.律师的指点值得我深思。
• The solicitor moved for an adjournment of the case.律师请求将这个案件的诉讼延期。

20 discriminate   

v.区别，辨别，区分；有区别地对待

参考例句：

• You must learn to discriminate between facts and opinions.你必须学会把事实和看法区分出来。
• They can discriminate hundreds of colours.他们能分辨上百种颜色。

21 restriction   

n.限制，约束

参考例句：

• The park is open to the public without restriction.这个公园对公众开放，没有任何限制。
• The 30 mph speed restriction applies in all built-up areas.每小时限速30英里适用于所有建筑物聚集区。

22 justification   

n.正当的理由；辩解的理由

参考例句：

• There's no justification for dividing the company into smaller units. 没有理由把公司划分成小单位。
• In the young there is a justification for this feeling. 在年轻人中有这种感觉是有理由的。

23 clement   

adj.仁慈的；温和的

参考例句：

• A clement judge reduced his sentence.一位仁慈的法官为他减了刑。
• The planet's history contains many less stable and clement eras than the holocene.地球的历史包含着许多不如全新世稳定与温和的地质时期。

24 marital   

adj.婚姻的，夫妻的

参考例句：

• Her son had no marital problems.她的儿子没有婚姻问题。
• I regret getting involved with my daughter's marital problems;all its done is to bring trouble about my ears.我后悔干涉我女儿的婚姻问题, 现在我所做的一切将给我带来无穷的烦恼。

25 scrutiny   

n.详细检查，仔细观察

参考例句：

• His work looks all right,but it will not bear scrutiny.他的工作似乎很好，但是经不起仔细检查。
• Few wives in their forties can weather such a scrutiny.很少年过四十的妻子经得起这么仔细的观察。

26 authorize   

v.授权，委任；批准，认可

参考例句：

• He said that he needed to get his supervisor to authorize my refund.他说必须让主管人员批准我的退款。
• Only the President could authorize the use of the atomic bomb.只有总统才能授权使用原子弹。