Straub was born on May 12, 1937, in Brooklyn, New York City, New York. He received a Bachelor of Arts degree from St. Peter's College in 1958, and his Bachelor of Laws from the University of Virginia School of Law in 1961. Straub served as a First Lieutenant in United States Army Intelligence and Security from 1961 to 1963. In 1963, he began the private practice of law with Willkie Farr & Gallagher, where he became a partner in 1971, and where he remained until his appointment to the federal bench. Straub's private practice was concentrated in litigation, regulatory agencies and governmental affairs.[1]
In January 2006, Straub was one of the three judges selected to hear National Abortion Federation v. Gonzales, 437 F.3d 278, one of the cases later folded into and resolved by Gonzales v. Carhart. The Second Circuit thereby became one of three circuits to uphold district court rulings against the constitutionality of the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003. Out of the nine circuit court judges who ruled on this issue, Straub was the only one to dissent, voting to reverse the district court and uphold the Act.
In the 2006 case of MacWade v. Kelly, Straub wrote for a unanimous three-judge panel of the Second Circuit that warrantless, suspicionless police searches of New York City Subway riders in response to terrorism were justified by the "special needs doctrine" and so did not violate the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution.[3]
In 2012, Straub dissented in Windsor v. United States, a case in which the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held in an opinion written by prominent conservative Chief Judge Dennis Jacobs, that Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) is unconstitutional.[4] Of the six circuit judges to rule on challenges to DOMA Section 3 brought by married same-sex couples, Straub was the only judge to find the law constitutional. He wrote that DOMA could easily be justified by Congress' "common sense." Straub also stated that DOMA was constitutional because "the state is . . . interested in preventing 'irresponsible procreation,' a phenomenon implicated exclusively by heterosexuals," and that "reserving federal marriage rights to opposite-sex couples 'protect[s] civil society.'" Straub went on to say that courts have no role in protecting minorities' civil rights "where there is a robust political debate because doing so poisons the political well, imposing a destructive anti-majoritarian constitutional ruling on a vigorous debate."[5] On June 26, 2013, the United States Supreme Court affirmed that DOMA Section 3 was unconstitutional because there was "strong evidence" that the "essence" of the law was "'a bare congressional desire to harm a politically unpopular group.'"[6]
