BRAINTREE -- A federal judge's recent ruling regarding federal legislation that upholds heterosexual marriage has drawn criticism from both local and national traditional marriage supporters.

U.S. District Judge Joseph Tauro ruled on July 8 in two separate cases that Section 3 of the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), a federal law that defines marriage as a union of one man and one woman, is unconstitutional because it prevents the state from exercising its right to define marriage.

Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley filed one of the challenges in United States District Court, contending that a part of the law is unconstitutional because it unfairly excluded Massachusetts same-sex couples and their families from important rights and protections and interfered with the state's authority to regulate marriage.

Locally, Massachusetts Family Institute President Kris Mineau accused Tauro of legislating from the bench and questioned the strategies of same-sex marriage advocates.

"Same-sex marriage activists have tried time and time again to win public approval of their agenda, and they have failed each time. This is why their strategy is to force same-sex 'marriage' through judicial fiat, as they did here in Massachusetts and other states.

Since 2004, five states have legalized same-sex marriage -- Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Hampshire, Vermont and Iowa -- as well as the District of Columbia.