. >> the united states versus windsor, that is the 83-year-old lesbian edith windsor who took her challenge of the defense of their attack to the supreme court four years ago after her spouse died. today we look at the remarkable story. in 1962, soon got engaged and had to wait 40 years before they could marry. >> edie and thea spent four years together, in sickness and in health, just like any other married couple. for the federal government to protect their marriage did that exist is unfair and an american and unconstitutional. >> we will hear excerpts of the film, "edie & thea: a very long engagement." we will play part of wednesday's landmark oral arguments before the supreme court. we will also host a discussion on same-sex marriage and the future of the lpg -- lgbt rights. all of that and more coming up. this is "democracy now!," democracynow.org, the war and peace report. i'm amy goodman. afghan police say five civilians, including four children, were killed in a night raid by afghan and international special forces in the eastern province of klo -- logar. while the afghan defense mi

hi, i'm edie windsor. somebody wrote me a large speech which i won't make good that there are a couple of things i wanted to say. i wanted to tell you what marriage meant to me. it's kind of crazy. we lived together for 40 years. we were engaged with a circle diamond and because i wouldn't wear a ring because i was still in the closet. , ok,today an out lesbian who just sued the united states of america, which is kind of overwhelming for me. when my beautiful sparkling thea died, i was overcome with grief. within a month, i was hospitalized with a heart attack. that is pretty common. it is usually look that as broken heart syndrome can in the midst of my grief, i realized that the federal government had been treating us like strangers and i paid a humongous estate tax if it meant selling a lot of stuff to do it. it wasn't easy. i live on a fixed income and it wasn't easy. many people ask me why get married? was 75 andd thea maybe we were older at that point. but the fact is that everybody treated us differ

she will represent edie windsor. there's a long line of today beginning with vicki jackson, a harvard law professor, specifically appointed to argue the case cannot be decided on the merits because the federal government no longer is defending section of three of the defense of marriage act. republican-dominated group of house members has come in to defend it. the question is do they have legal standing to do that? host: people are heading into the court right now as we are talking. it's only about 7:40. upst: many people were lined since last thursday for and these cases. eventually they will let them in out of the cold to go to the bathroom. once we get to this point on the day of an host: who will be arguing on the other side? guest: the main advocate against the federal government is a man by the name of paul, who many of your viewers are familiar with. he was the lead lawyer challenging the obama healthcare law last year. he is a former general under george w. bush. he will be representing the house members, the

windsor sued the united states and won. >> we did win in the lower courts. today is like a spectacular event for me. i mean, it's a lifetime kind of event, and i know that the spirit of my late spouse, thea spayer, is right here watching and listening and would be very proud and happy of where we've come to. >> reporter: windsor sat quietly in the front row of the spectators' section as at least five justices cast doubt on the wisdom, if not the constitutionality of doma. justice kennedy, a moderate whose vote could be crucial, saw doma as intruding on matters historically left to the states. >> you are at real risk of running in conflict with what has always been thought to be the essence of the state police power, which is to regulate marriage, divorce, custody. >> what gives the federal government the right to be concerned at all at what the definition of marriage is? >> you're saying, "no. state, there are two kinds of marriages, the full marriage and then this sort of skim milk marriage." >> reporter: windsor's lawyers pointed t that doma affects far mo

windsor, who did have an injury. as to why the district court didn't enter judgment when the united states switched its position, i -- i imagine that the court was -- would have wanted to have development of that issue, which was achieved through the intervention of the blag in the trial court, so that the judgment of unconstitutionality and of refund would have had a robust hearing >> really, that's very peculiar. when -- when both parties to the case agree on what the law is? what, the -- just for fun, the district judge is -- is going to have a hearing? >> well, your honor, the jurisdiction of the court, it seems to me, is not affected by the length of the proceedings it undertook. in kentucky >> i'm not talking about jurisdiction now. i'm talking about why the district court, without getting to the merits, should not have entered judgment against the government. >> i am not sure i have a wonderful answer to that question, justice scalia, but i do think the case bears some similarities to kentucky against indiana,

. >> edith windsor and thea spire got engaged years ago. it's wednesday, march 27th, i'm alex wagner. and this is "now." >> i am today an out lesbian who just sued the united states of america. >> the supreme court cracks open doma. the skim milk marriage. chad griffin helps us dissect today's developments. >> you are serious? you want to equate interracial marriage to a homosexual marriage? >> susie orman will break down what will happen when the right wing realizes it's wrong. >> i'm not concerned about the democratic party. i'm concerned about the people whose lives will be impacted by it. >> but will he make the moves? don't call it a comeback. >> toss the political scripts. >> sarah palin releases a new video with one message, 2014. >>> and a shocking report on the culture of violence in the military. no, not the one on the battlefield. the one on women. >> in 1965, edie windsor meat thea spire at a new york city restaurant. she would later tell the times that they danced so much that night. they fell in love, spent 44 years together a

windsor, before the highest court in the land. edith windsor married her wife in canada. her wife died, windsor was forced to pay $360,000 in inheritance tax, because her marriage, her legal marriage, was not recognized by the federal authorities under doma. lower courts have ruled against doma. the obama administration has refused to defend it. a lawyer for house republicans speaking for it today heard tough questions from six of the nine justices. >> well is what happened in 1996, and i'm going to quote from the house report here. is that congress decided to reflect and honor moral judgment and to express moral disapproval of homosexuality. is that what happened in 1996? what gives the federal government the right to be concerned at all at what the definition of marriage is? >> when it has 1,100 laws, which in our society means that the federal government is -- intertwined with the citizens' daily life, you are at real risk of running in conflict with what has always been thought to be the essence of the state police power, which is to regulate marriage, divorce, custod

windsor challenged doma and won in the lower courts. the obama administration then declined to defend the law further. with that, house republican leaders intervened, asking the supreme court to uphold doma. today, even some who support the law said they'd favor legal rights for same-sex couples, but not actual marriage. jim mcdonald is from alexandria, virginia. >> if people in civil unions were to get federal benefits that were equivalent to what married people get, that doesn't bother me at all. but the word marriage, i think needs to maintain it's traditional meaning. >> reporter: the court is expected to decide the "doma" case and yesterday's case involving proposition eight in california by june. >> suarez: marcia coyle of the "national law journal" was in the courtroom this morning and is back with us tonight. for people who don't follow this very closely, know that the two big arguments had to do with gay marriage, what are the main differences between yesterday's argument and today's? >> well, i think there is an inherent tensi

need to know this today the supreme court heard oral arguments in the case of the united states v windsor and it could be game over for one of the nation's most powerful symbols of sexuality based discrimination gender based what the second the second same sex marriage case in front of the supreme court today's u.s. v windsor calls into question one thousand nine hundred ninety six law that prohibits the federal government from giving gay couples the same tax breaks and benefits as straight couples even if those couples live in a state like massachusetts where gay marriage is legal according to petitioner edith windsor x. ban on federal recognition of state law violates fur fifth amendment equal protection rights judges in previous lower court cases of agreed with her and declare the law unconstitutional so it seems like a simple yes or no case right not so much or the weird things about the doma case is that the justice department the federal agency that normally represents the executive branch of government in cases like this openly disagrees with the act and has decided not to defend i

. >> that's after they heard 83-year-old edy windsor's case.lationship with her lesbian partner for 44 years. tahman bradley is following this high profile case. good morning, tahman. >> reporter: good morning, john. good morning, diana. nine states plus district of columbia allow same sex couples to wed. under federal law they are denied marriage benefits. but now, those couples have had their day in court. 83-year-old edie windsor took her fight for marriage equality to the supreme court. >> today is like a spectacular event for me. a lifetime kind of event. >> reporter: windsor and her wife, thea spire were married three years, partners for 40. when spire passed away she was hit with a $360,000 federal estate tax bill. money she would not have had to pay if she had been married to a man. >> in the midst of my grief, i realized the federal government was treating us as strangers. >> reporter: the defense of marriage act, or doma, defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman. so gays and lesbians who are legally wed in their states, c

. >> in 1965, edie windsor meat thea spire at a new york city restaurant. she would later tell the times that they danced so much that night. they fell in love, spent 44 years together and eventually, in 2007, they got married. >> we heard from literally hundreds of people, little playmates and schoolmates and friends and relatives all congratulating us and sending love because we were married. so it's a magic word, for anybody who doesn't understand why we want it and why we need it, okay.

which brungs us to today's plaintiff, edie windsor. married thea spyer 40 years after they became engaged. but after thia died in 2009,' dee did not get the same treatment that a heterosexual spouse would have inherited. >> i realized that the federal government was treating us as strangers and i paid a hue moneying gous estate tax. >> john: the defense of marriage act barred the irs from treating edie windsor as a surviving widowed spouse. she id paid about $360,000 in estate taxes that would not have been forthcoming if she had been married to man. ruth bader ginsberg argued that the law worked against state's interest, by weakening same-sex mare najs the states that allow them. >> john: and justice elaine that kagan, acting in defense of the government, sort of, to explain if the act was driven by prejudice against gays. >> john: it's important to be objective. i couldn't agree more. for more i'm pleased to be joined by wayne besen, and by brian moulton, legal director for the human rights campaign. gentlemen what a pleasure it is t

edith windsor is 80 some years old. she's from new york state. her spouse died.he was stuck with a bill for estate taxes of something like $363,000 or so. so she basically said she wanted her money back and ended up going to court. and that's the genesis of the case. but it's not just state taxes, it's 1,000 or so different benefits that you get as a result of marriage that are -- effect people in states where they have same sex marriage. and the question of course is whether those people ought to be able to get those benefits or not. >> if i could just have one point here, the reason this case is unusual from a procedural point of view is that she's suing and saying i want my money back. the federal government is saying, you're right, you should get your money back. doma is unconstitutional and the justices are saying why are we dealing with this case when the two main parties agree with each other? why is this a lawsuit at all? and that was a hard question for the lawyers to answer. >> and also important to say the last thing is, and you know this suzanne, a sm

edy windsor is being really punished. this is about whether she has to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars and potentially lose her home. what chris and sandy face is not a concept. this is whether they can make medical decisions for their children. in only 20 states if one of them is in the hospital can the other make a decision about their care. that is a real deal. so not only people have come to understand these are real issues and real injustices, they have come to understand they are happening to their, their children, their friends, their relatives. what this conversation has done, i think, is a whole lot more folks have come out and explained. no longer are you thinking about this in terms of -- it used to be a concept about those people. now it is a real thing about my people. when you think about it that way, it has a huge impact. that has also made a difference. look at a couple recent data points in polling. the "washington post" poll came out this week. 54% of evangelical millennial's, millennial voters, ess

edie windsor had her day in court. and what a day it was for her. this woman, born in the 1920s, has become a folk hero to countless young americans. >> you guys are talking freely. i'd have been hiding in a closet ten years ago. >> reporter: her case arises

windsor, her story is this.o her love of four years, her name was thea spyer, in 2007. and they lived in new york, one of nine states that recognized their same-sex marriage. when spyer died, windsor had to pay a chunk of change. she had to pay $360,000, plus, in estate taxes and so her point is this, that if her wife had been a man, had been a husband instead, there would have been no tax she had to pay. that's the benefit she lost because of doma and she spoke right after today's hearing. >> i felt we were very respected and i think it is going to be good. >> she thinks it is going to be good. we have to wait and see. jeff toobin, joining me again. as we mentioned a minute ago, we now finally have that audio from inside the oral arguments today. let me play this and then we'll get you to go through it with me. this is the exchange between justice ruth bader ginsburg and the attorney for those against same-sex marriage. roll it. >> the issue of same-sex marriage certainly implicates profound and deeply held vie

all eyes were on 83-year-old edith windsor. >> i am today a lesbian who sued the united states of americah is kind of overwhelming for me. >> reporter: she's challenges the defense of marriage act which denies federal benefits to same sex marriage couples. >> in the midst of my grief, i realized that the federal government was treating us as strangers and i pay this state tax. >> reporter: in court, justices attacked the 1996 law and the obama administration refusal to defend it. >> i'm wondering if we're living in this new world where the attorney general can simply decide it's unconstitutional but it's not so unconstitutional that i'm not willing to enforce it. if we're in this new world, i don't want these cases. >> reporter: the legal team defending doma told the court congress passed the law. the u.s. solicitor general said doma was based on moral disapproval and aimed at disfranchising same sex couples. >> as far as i can tell political figures are falling over themselves to endorse your side of the case. >> the fact of the matter is, no other group in recent history has been subjec

edie windsor, when miss windsor's spouse thea spyer died four years ago, she left the estate she got an inheritance tax bill for $363,000 because doma blocked the irs from considering them married. she says that tax bill was a shock. >> in the midst of my grief i realized the federal government was treating us as strangers and i paid a humongous estate tax. >> reporter: her lawyers claim her country has a different attitude about gay marriage. >> why are you so confident in that judgment? how many states permit gay couples to marry? >> today. nine, your honor. >> nine, and so, there's been this sea change between now and 1996? >> reporter: but the court's liberals sharply questioned doma saying the federal benefits denied legally married same-sex couples have a profound effect. >> they touch every aspect of your life. your partner is sick. and social security -- i mean, it's pervasive. the full marriage and then this sort of skim milk marriage. >> reporter: justice kennedy, potentially the pivotal vote, said the states, not congress, traditionally define what it means to be married a

and edith windsor, who everybody just saw, she was married in new york state. and her partner died. her wife died. and she had to pay $363,000 in federal income tax that she would not have had to pay if the federal government, the internal revenue service, had recognized their marriage. so she argued that the defense of marriage act by penalizing same sex marriage people involved in same sex marriages, that was a violation of their constitutional right. that was the case argued today. and it was a good day on balance i would say for edith windsor's side. >> joe, describe for us what was the most compelling moment inside the courtroom today. >> there were several compelling moments, but i would say there was the whole discussion about the defense of marriage act and the justifications or reasons for the government passing the law. the attorney who was defending the defense of marriage act maintained throughout that it was about uniformity. for example, creating a situation so that soldiers who move from bases from state to state wouldn't be confused about what their benefits are. but

her name is edith windsor. she married her partner in canada in 2007 after a relationship and engagement that lasted four decades. doctors said at the time she was dying and she did die two years later leaving edith windsor everything. had u.s. federal law recognized their marriage, edith windsor would have paid no taxes on the inheritance. because of the same sex only law for marriage here in the u.s. the federal government demand more than $360,000. that's when edith windsor sued. the fundamental question. doesn't she deserve the same rights guaranteed by the constitution as every other married person? her fight is the case that made it all the way up to the supreme court. edith was all smiles outside of today's proceedings if you would like to listen to today's arguments in their entirety we have posted a link on the front page of foxnews.com. the earth beneath the home giving way as a landslide cuts a huge chunk out of some shoreline property. look at this. the backyard is now gone. folks in the area say th

when spire died in 2009, windsor got slammed in $360,000 in federal estate taxes, money she would not have to pay if she was married to a man. gay and lesbian couples are not awarded a number of benefits, like spousal security, social security and veterans benefits. >> can the government deny to those legally married couples benefits available to heterosexual couples. >> reporter: the definition of marriage has ignited intense debate. yesterday the justices heard a challenge to california's proposition 8. the court seemed hesitant about making a decision. >> you want us to step in and render a decision based on an assessment of the effects of this institution which is newer than cell phones or the internet? >> reporter: and, cheryl, the obama administration no longer defends the defense of marriage act in court, but those same-sex couples will not see those benefits until the justices knock down the law. >> thank you. >>> well, the supreme court just released audio of today's hearing online and we have posted it for you on our website, abc7news.com. look under seen it on tv. >>> nancy

plaintiff on hand to witness today's arguments, 83-year-old new yorker, edie windsor is suing because the law barred the irs from recognizing the marriage to her partner 44 years. when her wife died she got a $364,000 tax bill that surviving straight spouse would not have to pay. she and one of her attorneys spoke out outside the court moments ago. >> i am today an out lesbian, okay, who just sued the united states of america, which is kind of overwhelming for me. today is like a spectacular event for me. of a lifetime. >> we walked down 44 steps, which coincidentally is how many years edie windsor and thea spire spent together as a committed couple and we ask for equal justice under law here. >> and the lawyer defending doma is deis taking to house republicans. just like yesterday, the hearing with demonstrators from both sides. >> as a conservative, i will tell you that doma wreaks of big government. >> we will no longer be satisfied with living in the shadows of freedom. we have the right to marry who we love. we have the right to work as we are. >> those who are anti-marriage equa

windsor brought the case in district court to challenge the constitutionality. justice department was there to defend it even though it later took a different position so arguably the only court in the -- in the history of this particular case that had jurisdiction would be the district court, so that would leave in place a ruling that doma is unconstitutional but it would only be a ruling of a lower court, and in that ruling would not itself have any press den shall impact on any other court. >> cenk: so it would not be an historic ruling that has wide ramifications. >> that's right. edie would win our claim for the $300,000 in tax she had to pay, but the problem, of course as a practical matter is that you have still got this federal law out there, and you -- you need to resolve the question of the constitutionality of it and truly the only institution that can resolve that question is the u.s. supreme court. >> cenk: so i assume if justice kennedy says this is an equal protection issue that that would be an historic landmark decision establishing that gay mar

when spire died in 2009, windsor got slammed in $360,000 in federal estate taxes, money she would not have to pay if she was married to a man. gay and lesbian couples are not awarded a number of benefits, like spousal security, social security and veterans benefits. >> can the government deny to those legally married couples benefits available to heterosexual couples. >> reporter: the definition of marriage has ignited intense debate. yesterday the justices heard a challenge to california's proposition 8. the court seemed hesitant about making a decision. >> you want us to step in and render a decision based on an assessment of the effects of this institution which is newer than cell phones or the internet? >> reporter: and, cheryl, the obama administration no longer defends the defense of marriage act in court, but those same-sex couples will not see those benefits until the justices knock down the law. >> thank you. >>> well, the supreme court just released audio of today's hearing online and we have posted it for you on our website, abc7news.com. look under seen it on tv. >>> nancy

we heard from the 83-year-old poster child of change, edy windsor. . i am today an out lesbian it's kind of overwhelming for me. >> she married her long-term partner in 2007 but when thea died two years later she was saddled with a six figure bill for inheritance tax that would not have aplayed if married to man. on the steps of the court she thanks the judges. >> very respected and i speak for it to be good. >> so after two days of hearings, it's pretty clear the court is not just divided, as you would expect, but conflicted about how boldly and broadly to rule on this issue. the words of justice anthony kennedy, he and his colleagues are in unchartered waters and we'll know in a few weeks how far they're prepared to go. steve kingston, bbc news at the u.s. supreme court. >> for more on the cases heard the past two days, i spoke a breathe time ago with adam, a supreme court reporter for "the new york times." adam, i know reading the tea leaves of the supreme court is a very inexact science but based on what you heard today, do you think edith windsor

(marie windsor) they also referred to my eyes as "bedroom" eyes.nd that didn't fit very well for a goody-goody wife or a nice little girlfriend, somebody tending the home. you're not strong or weak enough. what is there about a hoodlum that appeals to certain women? hoodlums, detectives, woman doesn't care how a man makes his living, only how he makes love. (kathryn bigelow) there's a certain male fantasy to this violent woman who is uncontrollable, kind of like an untamed animal. and i think there's something very seductive about that. so appealing, so dangerous, so lovely to look at, the darling of london, england, miss annie laurie starr. (gunfire) (kathryn bigelow) somebody tamed and compliant is less seducte. the fact it's unobtainable, touch it, it'll scratch you, is very attractive. i think people like to play with fire. (joe lewis) i wanted a beautiful, innocent, lovable young lady who was a demon. who was vicious and yet could charm you. i got the two of them together and i said, "peggy, you are a female dog in heat. and you, john, you're

abc's terry moran was there. [ cheers ] >> reporter: 83 and radiant, edie windsor had her day in court and what a day it was for her. >> all: edie, edie, edie. >> reporter: this woman born in the 1920s has become a kind of folk hero to countless young americans in the 20 teens. >> you guys, i'm talking to you freely. you know, i'd have been hiding in the closet ten years ago. >> reporter: her case arises from the love of her life, thea spire. they spent 44 years together in new york city. edie worked at ibm. thea was a therapist, and they finally married in 2007. but then after thea died in 2009, edie, who lives on a fixed income, was suddenly hit with $363,000 in estate taxes, taxes no straight widow would pay because the federal government refused to recognize their marriage under the defense of marriage act, which defines marriage under federal law as the union of one man, one woman, affecting taxes, social security, military survivor benefits. in court, justice ruth ginsburg said it seemed like a second-class system for gay couples. >> the states have two kinds of marriages, the fu

die case was brought by ed windsor. was denied a marital extension on federal estate taxes under the defense of marriage act. she is asking the down the law as on constitutional. the refund of the $363,000 in estate taxes. the argument begins with the question of standing and consideration. >> we will hear argument this morning in case 12-307, united states v. windsor, and we will begin with the jurisdictional discussion. ms. jackson? >> mr. chief justice, and may it please the court: there is no justiciable case before this court. petitioner, the united states, does not ask this court to redress the injuries it asserts. the house of representatives' bipartisan legal advisory group, the blag, which does seek redress in the form of reversal, asserts no judicially cognizable injury. while it is natural to want to reach the merits of such a significant issue, as in raines v. byrd, this natural urge must be put aside because, however important the constitutional question, article iii prevents its decision here and requires

group four points clear of their nearest rivals israel i'm portugal have both played a game or the windsor park stadium is a rather dated football venue and will soon be rebuilt from scratch there is no wonder so heating or even have a snow been cleared the pitch would have been too waterlogged to even attempt to try and play a game of football was when a very difficult trip for everyone but the people have suffered more than most abilify and so how difficult journey has it been for you because what. is this the just on and off. the weather's been awful yes today we spent all day walking around the town as the game was called off and we were soaking wet and our market were really surprised at the weather as we thought it would be around the fifteen to seventeen degrees around the time of year. sewer deposit you if i heard the news that the match would go ahead after all so we decided to calm and check for ourselves our flight back home was probably due to takeoff when the match should have started but it's a bt the game didn't take place much. it's been a frustrating trip for all concerned

windsor's spouse died four years ago and left her the estate, she got an inheritance tax bill for $350,000 because doma blocked the irs from considering them married. she says that tax bill was a shock. >> in the midst of my grief, i realized that the federal government was treating us as strangers, and i paid a humongous estate tax. >> reporter: some conservatives claim her lawyer's claim that the country has a different attitude now about same-sex marriage. >> why are you so confident in that judgment? how many states permit gay couples to marry? >> today? nine, your honor. >> nine. and so, there's been this sea change between now and 1996? >> reporter: but the court's liberals sharply questioned doma, saying the federal benefits denied legally married same-sex couples have a profound effect. >> they touch every aspect of life. your partner is sick. social security, i mean, it's pervasive. the full marriage and then this sort of skim milk marriage. >> reporter: justice kennedy, potentially the pivotal vote, said the states, not congress, traditionally defined what it means to be married

, 83-year-old edith windsor is the plaintiff at the core for the doma case.he will serve as grand marshal at the gay pride parade in new york city. she suffered a large financial loss when her partner died. some call doma the epitome of big government. asked whether bigotry is too big to fail. what do you think of that? >> edith's case, she's such a wonderful woman. look at the story there. women who were together for decades, their whole life together. one got sick. the other one didn't walk away, she stayed and took care of her until she died. that's a commitment. that's a union. that's a marriage. and then a little bit after her wife died, she gets a letter from the federal government saying you are less than everybody else, we'll really make you feel that you're less than everybody else through making you pay over $300,000. it's not about the money. it's about being left out from the rest of the country at a particular moment when you need everyone and everything support. bigotry has failed and been eroded and taken down time and time again in this countr

edith windsor is a plaintiff in the case. >> "they were certainly direct. they asked all the right questions. but i felt, though, i didn't feel any hostility okay, or any sense of inferiority, you know - what do these people want? i felt, were were very respected and i think, i think it's gonna be good.' >> catherine: what's good for edith is not good for others. one clergyman says if the defense of marriage act is shot down -- he's worried about colleagues bring forced to perform same sex ceremonies. >> "military chaplains, civilian chaplains who are under orders by federal authorities as well as other clergy required by law to uphold the constitution and in this case may have their authority to solemnize marriages held in doubt." >> catherine: long after court wrapped up today. people stayed outside the supreme court building.saying they wanted to be a part of legal history >> pam: the defense of marriage act marked the beginning of a decades=long debate over same sex unions. many of its original supporters now say it was a bad idea. the year was 1994. sa

. >> edie windsor yesterday was so awesome. love her. >> stephanie: yeah.airness not kick in when you listen to these human stories. sam in colorado writes why are christians so upset about gay people raising children when jesus was raised by two fathers. [♪ circus music ♪] >> stephanie: good morning, jim. >> hey that kid looks just like that roman santorium. >> stephanie: carl reiner on the show said. >> he has a new memoir. >> stephanie: yes, he does and he has an awesome son. we have lots to get to. karl frisch is here right out of the box. ♪ carl ♪ >> stephanie: karl frisch bullfightstrategies.com. ♪ so exciting to me ♪ ♪ frisch ♪ >> stephanie: good morning karl frisch. >> good morning, from the bul fight strategies office right across from the supreme court. noo >> stephanie: look at you. location, location location. >> it has been very exciting. i saw a group of junior high students with a sign that said kids deserve a mom and a dad, and i said and they deserve to be in school. [ laughter ] >> stephanie: yesterday doma your take on that obviously that

now, what i was told from sources at windsor castle is the queen has been badly dehydration.n with this stomach bout to feel dehydration, the problem is 86, remember, she is 87 next month, she would need to replace all the liquids she is losing very quickly, so one assumes she would be on some form of iv drip at the king edward vii hospital. as i say, yes, there is cause for concern because the queen just doesn't go to hospital. she was in her 50s before she went to hospital for vet first time. that was back in 1982. and she knows, as you have said, always a circus involved, always concern amongst her subjects but the people throughout the castle, yes, they are worried about this one. >> she seeming slay very fit, near 87-year-old. but she has had a very busy schedule during her jubilee year. engagements canceled or postponed for this week. what do you know about her schedule this year in comparison to last year? is it an issue of exhaustion, just doing too much potentially, being exposed to too much? nch>> i understand what you're saying, but we have this every year. when th

versus windsor. court will decide if the defense of marriage act violates the 5th amendment equal protection. justice scalia recently talked about possibly already making up his mind, should he recuse himself? it seems one side is going in with a definite disadvantage. guest: there is something to that. justices are not supposed to declare their views about a case before it has been argued. of the other hand, it is a little unrealistic to think the justices do not come to particular issues with a certain mindset. we know justice scalia is already written opinions in cases involving gay rights and he is generally committed to a philosophy of original as some and the people who wrote the 14th amendment were not thinking about same-sex marriage. yes, it is inappropriate for and to publicly express his views to on a case and then sit down a case. justice scalia's position on issues like abortion or same-sex marriage is we should stick with the original understanding and the people who wrote the 14th amen

tomorrow the court will hear arguments in the case of united states of the windsor this second same sex marriage case in front of the supreme court concerns the defense of marriage act signed into law by bill clinton the one nine hundred ninety six law prohibits the federal government from offering gay couples the same tax breaks and benefits accorded to straight couples even if those couples live in a state like massachusetts where gay marriage is legal according to petitioner edith windsor the act's ban on federal recognition of state law violates her fifth amendment equal protection rights bill clinton by the way now opposes the defense of marriage act that he signed into law the two cases are the supreme court's biggest since last year's inquiry into obamacare and have broad cultural residence at a time when america majority of americans have finally come around to supporting marriage equality protesters supporters of gay supporters and opponents of gay marriage alike have held large rallies all day just hundreds of feet from where the court's nine justices are considering the fate

tell that to an 83-year-old woman, edith windsor, fought to get the case to the court. and the case that bears her name, the highest court in the land, edith marries her wife in canada, when the wife died, edith is forced to pay $300,000 in taxes, because the marriage was not recognized. the obama administration refused to defend it. a lawyer for the white house speaking today, drawing tough questioning from six of the nine justices. >> well, is what happened in 1996 o19 1996, and i'm going to quote from the house report is that congress decided to reflect the honor and to express moral disapproval of homosexual, is that what happened in 1996? what gives the federal government the right to be concerned at all with what the definition of marriage is. >> when it has 1100 laws, which in our society means that the federal government is intertwined with the citizen's day to day life, you are at real risk of running in conflict with what has always been thought to be the essence of the state police power, which is to regulate marriage, divorce, custody. >> as justice kennedy