Claiming that the payment request represented extortion, and that the G & S deal constituted an invalid public purpose, Mr. Didden and Mr. Bologna sued in United States District Court.
In allowing the suit challenging the New York laws to go to trial, Judge Richard Berman cited United States Supreme Court cases that declared states' laws invalid if their purpose was "mere economic protectionism," which of course is the fundamental purpose of the laws being challenged.
"An undue burden exists," that decision reads, "and therefore a provision of law is invalid, if its purpose or effect is to place substantial obstacles in the path of a woman seeking an abortion".
In Planned Parenthood v. Casey that year, the Court declared, "An undue burden exists and therefore a provision of law is invalid if its purpose or effect is to place substantial obstacles in the path of a woman seeking an abortion before the fetus attains viability".
Laws like the Defense of Marriage Act that focus on a group long subjected to unfair discrimination, as gay people have been, should be presumed invalid unless lawmakers' purpose in adopting the law is shown to serve a real and compelling interest.
The Court held that a law is invalid if its "purpose or effect is to place substantial obstacles in the path of a woman seeking an abortion before the fetus attains viability".
"The federal statute is invalid, for no legitimate purpose overcomes the purpose and effect to disparage and to injure those whom the state, by its marriage laws, sought to protect in personhood and dignity.
Kennedy wrote: The federal statute is invalid, for no legitimate purpose overcomes the purpose and effect to disparage and to injure those whom the State, by its marriage laws, sought to protect in personhood and dignity.
"The federal statute is invalid, for no legitimate purpose overcomes the purpose and effect to disparage and injure those whom the state, by its marriage laws, sought to protect in personhood and dignity," Justice Kennedy wrote.
He declared: "The federal statute is invalid, for no legitimate purpose overcomes the purpose and effect to disparage and injure those whom the State, by its marriage laws, sought to protect in personhood and dignity".
