A portion of the federal Defense of Marriage Act that prohibited a federal tax exemption to the surviving spouse of a state-recognized same-sex marriage was unconstitutional.
By ReligiousLiberty.TV • February 26, 2026 • U.S. Const. amend. I
Cite This Case
United States v. Windsor (U.S. 2013).
✓ Copied!Standard law review / practitioner format. Verify against current Bluebook edition (21st ed.).
⚠ No official reporter citation found for this case. Citation quality will improve once a reporter citation (e.g. 573 U.S. 682) is added to the case record.
United States v. Windsor (U.S. Supreme Court, 2013). https://religiousliberty.tv/case-library/united-states-v-windsor/
✓ Copied!For legal scholarship in social science journals. Includes URL back to this case page.
⚠ No official reporter citation found for this case. Citation quality will improve once a reporter citation (e.g. 573 U.S. 682) is added to the case record.
United States v. Windsor [U.S. Supreme Court, 2013] — A portion of the federal Defense of Marriage Act that prohibited a federal tax exemption to the surviving spouse of a state-recognized same-sex marriage was unconstitutional. Source: ReligiousLiberty.TV (https://religiousliberty.tv/case-library/united-states-v-windsor/, accessed October 31, 2026).
✓ Copied!For general audiences, journalism, press releases, and non-legal writing.
⚠ No official reporter citation found for this case. Citation quality will improve once a reporter citation (e.g. 573 U.S. 682) is added to the case record.
Holding: A portion of the federal Defense of Marriage Act that prohibited a federal tax exemption to the surviving spouse of a state-recognized same-sex marriage was unconstitutional.
Uses AI to generate a structured summary. Takes ~10 seconds.
United States v. Windsor is a LGBTQ & Religious Liberty case decided by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2013. The court held that a portion of the federal Defense of Marriage Act that prohibited a federal tax exemption to the surviving spouse of a state-recognized same-sex marriage was unconstitutional.