The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ruled today that the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) unconstitutionally discriminates against married same-sex couples.

The case was brought to the court by Edith "Edie" Windsor. Windsor's wife, Thea Spyer, died in 2009 and she left all of her property to her spouse. While deceased spouse's estate typically would go to the surviving spouse without any estate tax, DOMA prevents the federal government from recognizing the state-recognized legal marriages of same-sex couples.

Windsor had to pay $363,000 in federal estate taxes as a result. More after the jump. 

Lawyers defending DOMA are certainly reaching--all the way back to 1885, in fact, in their attempts to legally justify the Defense of Marriage Act and the "traditional definition of marriage."  They're arguing that an 1885 polygamy case established a traditional definition of marriage.

The current case centers around Edie Windsor, a widow suing to recoup a $350,000 federal estate tax bill she was forced to pay because DOMA prevented her marriage to a woman from being recognized by the federal government.

More after the jump.

Is the average American tax payer aware that Republican Speaker of the House John Boehner keeps using their tax dollars to pay independent lawyers to defend the Defense of Marriage Act (after the Obama administration refused to), even though they lose EVERY TIME DOMA is brought under judicial review?

The mind boggles.

Anyway, DOMA has once again been ruled unconstitutional by a federal judge, this time in the case of Edie Windsor who was forced to pay a $353,053 estate tax bill after the death of her wife.

If her marriage had been recognized by the federal government the tax would not have applied, hence showing the discriminatory aspects of DOMA. More after the jump!