The US Justice Department Will Cease to Defend Federal Law on Gay Marriage

[Sunstone]

President Obama, in a major legal policy shift, has directed the Justice Department to stop defending the Defense of Marriage Act — the 1996 law that bars federal recognition of same-sex marriages — against lawsuits challenging it as unconstitutional.

Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. sent a letter to Congress on Wednesday saying that the Justice Department will now take the position in court that the Defense of Marriage Act should be struck down as a violation of gay couples’ rights to equal protection under the law.



“The President and I have concluded that classifications based on sexual orientation warrant heightened scrutiny and that, as applied to same-sex couples legally married under state law,” a crucial provision of the act is unconstitutional, Mr. Holder wrote.



Source.


What do you make of this?

 

[Gentoo]

About time.

 

[Skwim]

 

[Engyo]

It's just another distraction from serious budget discussions!:areyoucra[/sarcasm]

 

[LuisDantas]

About time, indeed.

 

[Levite]

Way, way, way past time. Stupid law should never have been passed anyway. Time for the government to get out of the religious morality business.

 

[Rainbow Mage]

I won't get my hopes up yet. After all, I did with the overturn of DADT, and look how that turned out. With a Republican Congress this will be an uphill battle.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Just another day showing the Republicans what it means to be American.

 

[Penumbra]

It's a good start but it needs to be repealed.

 

[Tarheeler]

It's a good start but it needs to be repealed.

I agree. Too bad Clinton signed it in the first place.

At least with the DoJ not defending it it has a chance to be struck down by the Court. Not a perfect resolution, but it will work.

 

[Penumbra]

I agree. Too bad Clinton signed it in the first place.

At least with the DoJ not defending it it has a chance to be struck down by the Court. Not a perfect resolution, but it will work.

Yeah. It's a bit silly to have a law that isn't defended. It's better than defending a bad law, though.

I was eight years old when this was signed into law, but I read that Clinton unfortunately supported the act. Considering it was passed in the Senate 85-14, and in the House 342-67, his veto, if he did so, wouldn't have mattered anyway.

 

[Engyo]

I wonder how many of our tax dollars our fiscally responsible Speaker of the House is willing to spend on this as opposed to the things he is adamant about cutting from the budget?

Boehner launches effort to defend gay marriage ban | Top AP Stories | Chron.com - Houston Chronicle

WASHINGTON — House Speaker John Boehner said Friday he is launching a legal defense by the House of the federal law against gay marriage, which President Barack Obama's administration has concluded is unconstitutional.

"The constitutionality of this law should be determined by the courts -- not by the president unilaterally," the Ohio Republican said in a statement. "This action by the House will ensure the matter is addressed in a manner consistent with our Constitution."

The Obama administration last month announced it would no longer defend the constitutionality of the federal law that bans recognition of gay marriage. Attorney General Eric Holder said the section of the 1996 law defining marriage as a union between a man and a woman is unconstitutional. Nonetheless, he said the Justice Department would continue to enforce the Defense of Marriage Act, and it remains in effect.

Boehner said he would convene a group of bipartisan congressional leaders that has the authority to instruct the House counsel to represent the chamber in court. The panel would include Boehner, Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va.; Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif.; Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi D-Calif., and Minority Whip Steny Hoyer, D-Md.

Boehner said he was convening the panel "for the purpose of initiating action by the House to defend this law." But there was no immediate indication of specifically what action it would direct or when the group would meet.

Democrats on the panel were unlikely to support any defense of the law. Pelosi has lauded Obama's decision to stop defending it as a "victory for civil rights, fairness and equality."

On Friday, she criticized the move as a costly burden on House staff.

"This is nothing more than a distraction from our most pressing challenges" such as creating jobs and reducing the federal deficit, she said.