Top Links: Everything you always wanted to know about the Supreme Court’s DOMA case (but were afraid to ask)

The Defense of Marriage Act is part love story, part tax nightmare — which means it has something for everyone, liberal or conservative.

Top story: It’s day two of the Supreme Court’s oral arguments over same-sex marriage. At bat: the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) case. It’s part love story, part tax nightmare — which means it has something for everyone, liberal or conservative.

• “Under DOMA, even if same-sex couples could legally marry in all fifty states, the federal government could still pretend they weren’t spouses.” Striking it down “would mean that same-sex marriages would be, simply, marriages, in every American context. It would make the injustice of the situation in states without marriage equality even plainer.” (The New Yorker)
• “Marriage Equality Now” flashed in big, block letters on the front of the Supreme Court building last night. (Rach & Jen)
• Occupy alumni are freezing off 100% of themselves while sleeping in front of the Supreme Court building. (Betsy Woodruff)
• “An 83-year-old widow with a huge tax bill is the perfect person to bring down an anti-gay law Bill Clinton signed in 1996.” (Business Insider)
• An excellent profile of the love story of Edith Windsor and Thea Spyer, whose love story forms the basis of DOMA’s United States v. Windsor case. Oh, and a note to single people everywhere: Want to meet the love of your life? Know how to dance. (Buzzfeed Politics)
• A history of the restaurant where Edith Windsor met Thea Spyer, this piece is also a trip back into glorious, old New York City. (City Room)
• The DOMA case is about Edith Windsor’s estate tax bill. However, “The income tax is where the action is: The Congressional Budget Office has estimated that hundreds of thousands of same-sex couples face different income tax bills because of DOMA.” (Tax Policy Center)
• But let’s not forget the political context: “SCOTUS today is Obama administration vs. House Republicans on DOMA.” (Domenico Montanaro)
• “Those defending DOMA have been strangely unwilling to make their arguments outside of the court.” (NPR)
• Of course, House Republicans were willing to spent $3 million in taxpayer money to defend it. (The Hill)
• The 1996 law is an uncomfortable chapter in the history of the Clinton Administration — a chapter that Bob Shrum has said didn’t end until much later than people think. (Buzzfeed Politics) and (The Atlantic Wire)
• The Onion: “Supreme Court on Gay Marriage: ‘Sure, Who Cares’” (The Onion)