Page:United States v. Windsor.pdf/34

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been validated.
4
UNITED STATES v. WINDSOR
Roberts, C.J., dissenting

marriage definitions affecting same-sex couples. That issue, however, is not before us in this case, and we hold today that we lack jurisdiction to consider it in the particular context of Hollingsworth v. Perry, ante, p. ___. I write only to highlight the limits of the majority's holding and reasoning today, lest its opinion be taken to resolve not only a question that I believe is not properly before us—DOMA's constitutionality—but also a question that all agree, and the Court explicitly acknowledges, is not at issue.