Obama: Screw DOMA.

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from WhatIsItNow. Show WhatIsItNow's posts

    Obama: Screw DOMA.

    Govt drops defense of anti-gay marriage law

    By Pete Yost Associated Press / February 23, 2011

    WASHINGTON—The Obama administration says it will no longer defend the constitutionality of a federal law that bans recognition of same-sex marriage.

    In a statement Wednesday, Attorney General Eric Holder says President Barack Obama has concluded that the administration can no longer defend the federal law that defines marriage as only between a man and a woman.

    The Justice Department had defended the Defense of Marriage Act in court until now.

     

    http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2011/02/23/govt_drops_defense_of_anti_gay_marriage_law/

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from WhatIsItNow. Show WhatIsItNow's posts

    Re: Obama: Screw DOMA.

    Really?  I mean nobody has to comment... 

    Oh well.  To those who always raised Obama's defense of DOMA to counter a suggestion that Republicans are anti-gay-rights or to counter the suggestion that Democrats are pro-gay-rights....    that dissapeared.

    Through various means, he will have effected the end of DADT and DOMA during his first time.


    ________________________________________________________________-

    WASHINGTON — 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 act should be struck down as a violation of same-sex 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.

    [continues]

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/24/us/24marriage.html?hp
     

Share