The Obama Justice Department filed another defense of the Defense of Marriage Act in court this morning, but they decided not to use right-wing arguments about child-raising and marrying minors as they had done previously. They don't like the law, but they are bound to defend it, they say:
"This Administration does not support DOMA as a matter of policy, believes that it is discriminatory, and supports its repeal," the new brief from Justice Department lawyer Scott Simpson said. "Consistent with the rule of law, however, the Department of Justice has long followed the practice of defending federal statutes as long as reasonable arguments can be made in support of their constitutionality, even if the Department disagrees with a particular statute as a policy matter, as it does here," Simpson wrote.
If Americans start to wonder what's the point of changing Administrations, I think I would forgive them. This Obama tendency to defer to bad law, whether detention, wiretapping, or civil discrimination, is simply insider lawyer-speak:
"This longstanding and bipartisan tradition accords the respect appropriately due to a coequal branch of government and ensures that subsequent administrations will faithfully defend laws with which they may disagree on policy grounds," he added in a footnote.
Do these people even understand that they were elected on a platform of Hope-y Changiness? Do they understand what the American people expect from them? Do they not grasp the nature of their mandate, whether on health care, civil liberties, or civil rights?
The Obama Administration's continued deference to what came before is becoming a huge character flaw.
http://firedoglake.com/2009/08/17/defending-the-indefensible-doma/I guess it's not just the public option Democrats that are getting thrown under the bus today.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
