Does the Windsor/DOMA ruling mean federal protections for gay immigrants now?

[Brittain33]

Yes. I saw one case of a deportation case stopped because the guy can now apply for residency as the spouse of a U.S. citizen. This is a massive relief for people in binational couples who are largely ignored by average people.

[Brittain33]

I don't think it works that way. Federal immigration law looks to see if you are married. If two women marry in NY or NH, they are married for federal purposes and therefore for immigration. DOMA's overturn was precisely about the Feds not having to make their own definition here or average things out.

[Brittain33]

You are correct that Romney would have put up all kinds of administrative roadblock.

Obama's administration will direct immigration authorities to recognize lawful same-sex marriages in immigration law and that will become policy. A few bitter Enders will circumvent the policy and mistreat gay and lesbian immigrants, and hopefully get sued, but they will be out of line with policy, same as a racist immigration agent would be. It really is that simple.

[Brittain33]

It's entirely possible Obama's administration will do some roadblocking as well, just as it did with the Windsor case.  By that I mean, they'll continue to deny same-sex spouses the immigration status opposite-sex spouses would have, but not defend the policy in court.   Obama has shown a strong tendency to play rope-a-dope with laws it doesn't like, but which it can't get Congress to change.

Janet Napolitano has already issued a statement proclaiming that married same-sex couples will have equal standing in immigration and they are moving forward with changing policy.

[Brittain33]

I don't think it works that way. Federal immigration law looks to see if you are married. If two women marry in NY or NH, they are married for federal purposes and therefore for immigration. DOMA's overturn was precisely about the Feds not having to make their own definition here or average things out.

What if they were married in another country with legal SSM, and neither party lives in, has ever lived in, or intends to live in one of the 12 states with legal SSM?  The federal government recognizes their marriage for the purpose of allowing immigration, but the immigration is to Texas where SSM is not legal?

That's a good question. Given the contortions these couples go through, I fully expect they'd settle in an equality state just to avoid this problem--they are by nature more mobile people.

I expect a couple married in France which is transferred to Texas for work will have their marriage recognized by the Feds because it is legal in France and there is no obvious conflict with federal law (as there is with polygamy).