Obama’s Justice Department Dismisses Case Against the Defense of Marriage Act; Gay Activists are not Happy

  During the campaign the president tried to play both sides of the gay marriage issue. He claimed that he believes a marriage is between one man and one woman while at the same time promising to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) that was signed into law by President Clinton.

  But now he is finding it hard to defend both positions at the same time and last week the administration filed a motion to dismiss a lawsuit that was filed against the Defense of Marriage Act. This has infuriated some gay rights groups who consider this a flip-flop on one of his campaign promises.

The president made very explicit and emphatic campaign promises that he opposes DOMA and would provide leadership calling on Congress to repeal it,” said Jennifer Pizer, marriage project director for Lambda Legal. “This brief is not consistent with that promise.”

  The United States Justice Department has said that DOMA is constitutional based on state’s rights issues and as such the administration would not allow challenges to DOMA in the justice system.

Until Congress passes legislation repealing the law, the administration will continue to defend the statute when it is challenged in the justice system

  The president is using stare decisis. You remember the huge deal that was made about stare decisis in regards to abortion during the confirmation hearing of Chief Justice Roberts don’t you? The left was petrified that if Roberts was confirmed as Chief Justice he would ignore stare decisis and that he would reverse Roe vs Wade. Suddenly the left is no longer interested in stare decisis any more.

  This does not mean that the president does not want to see DOMA repealed, he claims that he will support a bill to repeal the law if it is passed in congress but that isn’t good enough for the far left. They want the court to impose their beliefs upon the rest of America. The dismissal of this case does not go against his campaign promise to repeal DOMA. A lawsuit is not the way to go about repealing a law.

  The president will continue to try and please both sides on this issue. He has always said that he opposes gay marriage yet he will support the repeal of DOMA. These two positions are at odds with each other, we will not be able to hold these dueling positions for much longer. He will have to take one position eventually and I think we know which side he will ultimately come down in favor of. But do we?

U.S. Department of Justice lawyers argued that the act — known informally as DOMA — is constitutional and contended that awarding federal marriage benefits to gays would infringe on the rights of taxpayers in the 30 states that specifically prohibit same-sex marriages.

  If the administration truly believes the position stated above than wouldn’t a bill that repeals DOMA also “infringe on the rights of the taxpayers?” How could he then find a repeal of DOMA acceptable using the guideline stated above?

   The gay rights groups are not to blame for their anger at the president, nobody really knows where he stands on the issue of gay marriage because of his dueling positions during the campaign. He was able to convince the right that he opposed gay marriage while at the same time convincing the left that he would repeal DOMA. Both sides assumed that he was lying about the opposite position from which they held.

  One side will be right, we just don’t know which one yet. If the president does sign a repeal of DOMA  we know that he has been lying about his position on gay marriage all along. If he refuses to sign a repeal of DOMA (highly unlikely)  we will know that he lied about his position on that issue. Either way there are going to be quite a few people upset with the president, this is a no win situation for him. He should have just given us a clear position during the campaign and he wouldn’t be in this predicament, the American people would have voted him into office KNOWING his position, instead of seeing in him the position they wanted him to hold.

  This is what happens when you try to be all things to all people. But for now at least we have to give him just a little bit of credit for following stare decisis  and for now bowing down to the extreme pressure of the far left by allowing the court create law. (A position that seems at odds with his supreme court nominee who claims that the courts are where policy is created.)