Depends on what the SCOTUS says that is.
Ironbite-my feeling they'll uphold the lower court and uh-oh...fundies will be screaming.
I have no idea how the USSC will rule. The one thing that gives me hope is knowing that DOMA has been struck down twice.
There's three levels of scrutiny used in equal protection cases: strict scrutiny (discrimination based on race or alienage, or violations of fundamental rights), intermediate scrutiny (discrimination based on gender or illegitimacy of birth), and rational basis (everything else).
The first big question is what level of scrutiny the Court will use. I strongly doubt it will be strict, as that would be a huge political step for the Court (putting sexual orientation on the same level as race). On the other hand,
Loving v. Virginia declared marriage to be a fundamental right. Also, that case was based on the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the Constitution. (I have not seen the holding, so do not know under what grounds DOMA was challenged.) Intermediate scrutiny is possible, but that would also be making a statement. On the other hand, the holding in
Lawrence v. Texas uses language usually used when discussing intermediate scrutiny (though not all the language). Rational basis is the easiest level of scrutiny to overcome; a law is upheld if it is rationally related to a legitimate government interest. (To quote my bar prep book, "the law is usually valid -- unless it is arbitrary or irrational.") That's what led me to say my ray of hope is based on the fact it has been found unconstitutional twice.
No court is going to use a higher level of scrutiny until the Court has used that same one in a case about the same kind of discrimination, which leads me to believe if it was challenged under equal protection, it was reviewed under rational basis. Which means two courts have, so far, found DOMA to have no rational relationship with a legitimate governmental interest. Since rational basis is such a low bar, it would be hard for the proponents of DOMA to come up with something they haven't already (unsuccessfully) used.