{"database": "press", "table": "releases", "rows": [["https://www.king.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/king-colleagues-urge-social-security-administration-to-implement-supreme-court-marriage-decision-not-penalize-previously-married-same-sex-couples", "King, Colleagues Urge Social Security Administration to Implement Supreme Court Marriage Decision, Not Penalize Previously Married Same-Sex Couples", "2015-10-26", "2015", "2015-10", "Independent", "House", "ME", "Angus King", "K000383", "www.king.senate.gov", null, null, "legacy", "King, Colleagues Urge Social Security Administration to Implement Supreme Court Marriage Decision, Not Penalize Previously Married Same-Sex Couples\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\tMonday, October 26, 2015\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\n\t\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\tWASHINGTON, DC  U.S. Senator Angus King (I-Maine), along with several of his Senate and House colleagues, today sent a letter to the Acting Commissioner of the Social Security Administration Carolyn W. Colvin and U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch urging them to ensure that the Supreme Courts landmark marriage decisions are implemented and that the Social Security Administration (SSA) is treating marriages equally. The letter urges SSA not to penalize married same-sex couples who received Supplemental Security Income (SSI) overpayments due to SSAs delayed implementation of the law following the Supreme Courts decision in United States v. Windsor.\r\nWe are concerned to hear that, for some time after the Supreme Courts Windsor decision, SSA continued to issue benefits to Supplemental Security Income recipients in same-sex marriages as though these individuals were single, and that for some SSI recipients, SSA is still doing so, Senator King and his colleagues wrote. SSA should not penalize people who are poor, elderly or disabled because SSA continued issuing benefits to these married individuals as though they were single. According to SSAs statute and regulations, SSA shall avoid penalizing an individual for overpayment if the individual is without fault and if recovery of the overpayment would be against equity and good conscience.\r\n[W]e urge SSA to issue a blanket waiver for recovery of overpayment for all of these individuals automatically  especially since SSAs inability to update its systems resulted in SSAs continuing to apply Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act long after the Supreme Court struck it down as unconstitutional, the letter continues.\r\nIn the letter, Senator King and his colleagues also ask SSA to respond with information about how the agency is identifying affected SSI recipients and its efforts to update its systems so that benefits are administered fairly to all individuals.\r\nIn addition to Senator King, the letter was signed by 37 other senators, including Senators Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), Bob Casey (D-Pa.), Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), Ben Cardin (D-Md.), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), Al Franken (D-Minn.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Mazie K. Hirono (D-Hawaii), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), Bob Menendez (D-N.J.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Barbara Mikulski (D-Md.), Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Gary Peters (D-Mich.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), Tom Udall (D-N.M.), Mark Warner (D-Va.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.).\r\nThe letter also was signed by 82 U.S. Representatives, including Congresswoman Chellie Pingree.\r\nThe complete text of the letter is below and can be read HERE.\r\n+++\r\nDear Commissioner Colvin and Attorney General Lynch,\r\nWe are writing to inquire about the steps Social Security Administration (SSA) is taking to ensure that it can correctly account for marital status and administer benefits fairly to all individuals.\r\nThe Supreme Courts decisions in United States v. Windsor and Obergefell v. Hodges were major victories for our countrys core values of fairness and equality. We understand that SSA continues to work to implement the Supreme Courts 2013 decision in United States v. Windsor that held Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional  ending the federal governments system of discrimination against legally married same-sex couples. We are pleased that SSA in coordination with the Department of Justice is now working to implement the Supreme Courts 2015 decision in Obergefell v. Hodges that recognized equal rights of same-sex couples to marry. It is especially important that SSA has systems in place to ensure that it is treating all legal marriages equally.\r\nWe are concerned to hear that, for some time after the Supreme Courts Windsor decision, SSA continued to issue benefits to Supplemental Security Income recipients in same-sex marriages as though these individuals were single, and that for some SSI recipients, SSA is still doing so. Because benefits for unmarried individuals are higher than those for married individuals, SSAs failure to update its policies resulted in overpayments. We understand that SSA has sent overpayment notices to these individuals even though they were overpaid due to SSAs delayed implementation of the law.\r\nGay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders recently brought a lawsuit alleging that SSA discriminated against Supplemental Security Income recipients in same-sex marriages when SSA failed to recognize these marriages  even when the individuals had notified SSA that they were married. The court dismissed the case without addressing the merits, finding that the plaintiffs failed to exhaust administrative remedies.[1]\r\nSSA should not penalize people who are poor, elderly or disabled because SSA continued issuing benefits to these married individuals as though they were single. According to SSAs statute and regulations, SSA shall avoid penalizing an individual for overpayment if the individual is without fault and if recovery of the overpayment would be against equity and good conscience. [2] While we understand that generally, SSA makes an individualized determination in the case of an overpayment, we urge SSA to issue a blanket waiver for recovery of overpayment for all of these individuals automatically  especially since SSAs inability to update its systems resulted in SSAs continuing to apply Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act long after the Supreme Court struck it down as unconstitutional. Under these circumstances, any effort on the part of SSA to collect overpayments would exacerbate the unlawful discriminatory effect of the Defense of Marriage Act and would be against equity and good conscience.\r\nWe would appreciate a response to the questions below by November 18, 2015.\r\n1) How many notices has SSA sent seeking to recoup overpayments from individuals married to someone of the same sex?\r\n2) Is SSA currently recouping any money in these circumstances and, if so, from how many people?\r\n3) How does SSA identify Supplemental Security Income recipients whose benefits should be reduced or suspended because their marriages are now recognized as a result of Windsor or Obergefell?\r\n4) How long would it take for SSA to identify all of the individuals who have received incorrect payments from SSA due to SSAs mistakes in accounting for same-sex marriages?\r\n5) Why would it be necessary and a good use of agency resources to put these individuals through an administrative appeal process one at a time?\r\n6) How long does SSA expect a typical appeal process on these facts to take?\r\n7) What is SSA doing to update its systems and processes so that SSA can correctly take marital status into account and administer benefits fairly to all individuals?\r\nWe urge SSA to implement the Supreme Courts decisions as soon as possible and to waive recovery of the overpayments that SSA made to the affected individuals. We appreciate your attention to this matter and look forward to your response.\r\nSincerely,\r\n###", 1, "2026-03-30T12:14:52Z", "2026-03-30T12:14:52Z"]], "columns": ["url", "title", "date", "year", "month", "party", "chamber", "state", "member_name", "bioguide_id", "domain", "scraper", "source", "date_source", "text", "has_text", "collected_at", "updated_at"], "primary_keys": ["url"], "primary_key_values": ["https://www.king.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/king-colleagues-urge-social-security-administration-to-implement-supreme-court-marriage-decision-not-penalize-previously-married-same-sex-couples"], "units": {}, "query_ms": 0.772977015003562, "source": "dwillis/congress-press", "source_url": "https://github.com/dwillis/congress-press", "license": "MIT", "license_url": "https://github.com/dwillis/congress-press/blob/main/LICENSE"}