FamilyFoundationBlog.com

Last week, President Barack Obama directed the U.S. Department of Justice to relinquish defending the Defense of Marriage Act, a law passed by Congress in 1996 defining marriage as between one man and one woman.  The positive I find in this announcement is that finally the Obama administration is being honest about its hostility toward DOMA — no more halfhearted statements. The negatives, however, are overwhelming. 
 
As I told the Richmond Times-Dispatch last week, the president is responsible for defending the laws duly enacted by Congress. It’s disappointing that President Obama would unilaterally make a decision to abdicate that duty. The job of the executive branch is to enforce and defend the nation’s laws, not to selectively pick and choose. Thirty-one states have marriage amendments on the books defining marriage as between one man and one woman. Clearly, voters believe that the content of DOMA is a reasonable measure. This administration has been clear on its position on homosexual rights, but they stand outside the majority of Americans.
 
President Obama’s directive could have far reaching consequences. This decision could potentially impact every yet-to-be-decided case related to marriage (including California’s Proposition 8 appeal). Essentially, the fully compensated defense attorney is failing to show up for his defendant’s court date, an action where the judge would sanction the attorney. In what other area of the law would this be tolerated? 
 
With the president ordering the Justice Department to abandon its duties, the only course of action to defend DOMA is for Congress to intervene. According to Politico, House Speaker John Boehner and the Republican majority on Friday will announce a course of legal action to defend DOMA, perhaps directing the House’s legal counsel to defend DOMA in court. (On a side note, this situation perfectly illustrates the importance of elections. Had Nancy Pelosi retained her position as House Speaker, it is highly unlikely that she would even consider defending DOMA in the Justice Department’s stead and the fate of marriage would be doomed.)
 
A breakdown of DOMA ties to a breakdown of American families. There is a litany of statistics showing that a one-man, one-woman marriage is the best institution in which to raise children and to lower the potential for poverty, illiteracy and crime. Even if the president refuses to order the defense of the laws of the land, we must continue to push for the defense of a law that is good for our families, our churches and our communities.

Even as the fallout from the Prop 8 ruling is still getting sorted, another legal proceeding dealing with a major marriage protection law is ongoing. But barely. Whereas the defenders of California’s Marriage Amendment filed a prompt appeal and yesterday won a stay on San Francisco Federal District Judge Vaughn Walker’s deplorable decision at least until the end of the year (San Francisco Chronicle), the Obama Justice Department’s weak and meek defense of the federal Defense of Marriage Act appears to have “thrown the match” and it says it is not certain whether it will appeal a recent Massachusetts Federal District Court’s decision that ruled DOMA unconstitutional. As Chuck Donovan writes at The Heritage Foundation’s The Foundry blog:

Echoing some of the most notorious boxing matches in the history of the ring, the Obama-Kagan Justice Department engaged in what even one supporter of same-sex marriage, the distinguished constitutional law scholar Richard Epstein, labeled “almost like collusive litigation,” where the adversaries in a case are secretly on the same side.

The collusion boils down to this: attorneys in the Obama Justice Department, who have sworn that they will “well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office” in which they serve, abandoned not one but all four of the bases for DOMA asserted by Congress. “Congress” in this instance was no small minority cobbled together at the last instant for legislation it scarcely debated, but a bipartisan majority that encompassed 85 percent of both houses of Congress, joined by a Democratic president (Bill Clinton) who had access to comprehensive reports that amplified the many grounds for DOMA.

The Justice Department’s concessions were crucial to the outcome in the case. As Judge Joseph Tauro noted, he felt bound to address the detailed justifications Congress provided for DOMA only briefly, because, “For the purposes of this litigation, the government has disavowed Congress’s stated justifications for the statute[.]“

As Family Research Council President Tony Perkins (see FRC Blog) wrote yesterday: 

The Defense of Marriage Act merely defines marriage — for federal purposes — as being between one man and one woman, and protects states from having to change their state definitions. Not surprisingly, a liberal court in Massachusetts — after a weak defense from the Obama Justice Department — ruled DOMA unconstitutional. Amazingly, the federal government appears to be dragging its feet as they contemplate whether or not to EVEN APPEAL the decision! If the Department of Justice does not appeal, it is unlikely outside defenders of marriage will even be allowed to defend marriage in court.

The Department of Justice is supposed to vigorously defend statutes passed by Congress, not to roll over to appease President Obama’s political base.

So, FRC Action has started a nationwide petition to hold the Justice Department accountable and to do its job — appeal and aggressively defend the law of the land. Please take time to sign the petition (click here to sign) and send a clear message to the Obama administration. He has said he believes marriage is between one man and one woman (ABCNews.com). It’s time he proves it with a vigorous defense of federal law he is sworn to uphold.

Last week, the Senate Judiciary Committee approved Elena Kagan for a place on the U.S. Supreme Court. We urge Virginians to contact U.S. Senators Mark Warner and Jim Webb now and urge them to vote “No” on her confirmation.

A few days ago, The Family Foundation signed on to a letter written by Americans United for Life that will be sent to senators urging them to conduct a thorough investigation regarding Ms. Kagan prior to voting on her confirmation.

While there are several reservations about her qualifications for the court, it is her judicial philosophy that gives us the most pause. At 50 years old (16 years younger than the average age of the current Supreme Court justices), Ms. Kagan’s impact, if confirmed, will last much longer than most justices. Therefore, it is even more critical that her judicial philosophy is properly vetted, her integrity examined, and her commitment to respect the constitution and the laws of our nation determined. Failure to uphold the law is refusing the people their freedom to self-govern.

Ms. Kagan has done precisely that. As Solicitor General, she failed to defend the Defense of Marriage Act in Gill v. Office of Personnel Management (see PointofLaw.com). The Department of Justice, along with Ms. Kagan, stated that it does “not believe that DOMA is rationally related to any legitimate government interests in procreation and child-rearing.” Not only is this utter disrespect for the God-given institution of marriage, but also a disowning of the binding laws of our land. Take a guess at how Ms. Kagan would rule on a Supreme Court challenge to DOMA . . . or any other enshrined law of the land for that matter?

Additionally, Ms. Kagan is implicated, despite her recent denial in Senate testimony, in unethical actions while she was an adviser to then-President Bill Clinton, where she manipulated and even rewrote memos from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. That organization wrote that there was never a defense for partial birth abortion, but she altered ACOG’s definition of partial birth abortion in order to nullify the meaning of the memos (see LifeNews.com). 

It is markedly clear from her actions as solicitor general on the DOMA issue, her integrity in her relations with ACOG, and her contempt for the military (as Harvard Law School Dean, she banned the Pentagon from recruiting on campus) that Elena Kagan will be an activist justice making law, rather than a justice interpreting the law. This approach, and her leftist agenda, is contrary to how the majority of Virginians view the role of the U.S. Supreme Court. It is about time that our two U.S. Senators live up to their self-labeled titles of “radical centrist” and “moderate,” show some independence, and vote with the majority of Virginians and not simply as puppets of Harry Reid.

Please contact Senators Mark Warner and Jim Webb and urge them to vote “No” on the confirmation of Elena Kagan to the U.S. Supreme Court. Click here to contact Senators Warner and Webb.

Annotations & Elucidations

Virginia’s own, Republican Whip Eric Cantor, makes the national headlines, again, with his rebuttal of the administration’s analysis of its “stimulus” program. He says it ain’t working. Speaking of money, the commonwealth is going to report more bad news tomorrow on revenue projections on which to fund the budget, which means more cuts are on the way by the DNC Chairman, Governor Tim Kaine.

As Chris wrote in the previous post, Democrat gubernatorial candidate Creigh Deeds has yet another position on abortion. First, it wasn’t going to be an issue. Then it became an issue for everyone. Now, it’s one only for the poor. See the analysis by J.R. Hoeft at BearingDrift.com.

There’s a lot else going on. Of course, health care, which is all consuming, it seems. But there’s a new angle — the White House invasion of your e-mail. Bobby Eberle and others discuss it, as well as the thought-cop in chief, the new “Diversity Czar.” Then, there’s the AARP, deservedly losing members for flirting with siding with socialized medicine and rationed care for its own constituency! Plus, don’t miss the always great Thomas Sowell’s take on it. We also have more on the Obama Justice Department trying its best to undermine the Defense of Marriage Act in a underhanded way.

For those who think only the left knows how to generate engaged communities of activists via the new media, 600 conservative bloggers and online activists gathered in Philly last weekend at the Right Online conference. Rachel Alexander has the exciting details. We have several commentaries on the old school activism — town hall style.

Finally, our thoughts and prayers go out to American Family Association Founder Don Wildmon, who is in the hospital suffering from meningitis. He was in intensive care, but his son reports improvement.

News:

Assembly hears the bad news tomorrow (Fredericksburg Free Lance-Star)

Virginians Divided On Obama’s Actions (Washington Post)

McDonnell pays visit to UVa, touts affordable tuition plan (Charlottesville Daily Progress)

Va. Northern Neck GOP Embraces Crabill — Again (Washington Post Virginia Politics Blog)

2 more Republicans say they will challenge Perriello (Richmond Times-Dispatch)

National:

Obama disses marriage law as Justice defends it (AP/GOPUSA.com)

Cantor: Stimulus not working as advertised (AP/GOPUSA.com)

White House says it did not send unwanted e-mails (AP/GOPUSA.com)

AARP loses members over health care stance (AP/GOPUSA.com)

Christian leader hospitalized with meningitis (AP/OneNewsNow.com)

Analysis:

Deeds supports abortion for only the poor? (J.R. Hoeft/BearingDrift.com)

Say Hello to the Diversity Czar (Bobby Eberle/GOPUSA.com)

600 Pack out Right Online conference last weekend (Rachel Alexander/GOPUSA.com)

Commentary:

Whose Medical Decisions? (Thomas Sowell/GOPUSA.com)

From Tea Parties To The 9/12 Project, Americans Are Challenging The Government (Thomas D. Segel/GOPUSA.com)

Obama’s Thought Police Invading Your Inbox (Bobby Eberle/GOPUSA.com)

Towhall Power! Americans Making A Difference (Bobby Eberle/GOPUSA.com)

You hear sports commentators talk about it all the time, although referees deny it: The Make Up Call. When a ref thinks he missed a foul or made a bad call, he will even it up later in the game on an unsuspecting player on the opposite team. Once, in a rare moment of candor, when I coached travel soccer, a ref told me as I complained about a bad call he made against my team: “You got a call down there, we’re making it up here!” Nevermind that he made the right call earlier.

Thus, President Barack Obama’s reaction today to the homosexual lobby’s outcry over his decision to defend the Defense of Marriage Act in federal lawsuit (see yesterday’s post): He’s going to grant the extension of employee benefits to ”partners” of homosexual federal workers. However, this is pyrrhic at best to many homosexual activists and may have steamed them off at the POTUS plenty more, as Ben Smith reports at The Politico. You see, while it at first the Mainstream Media reported it as a great win for the homosexual lobby, the fact is that DOMA prohibits the extension of health insurance and retirement benefits to same-sex partners. There’s that DOMA, again, which the president is defending. According to an update on Smith’s post at The Politico:

“Are they kidding us? Domestic Partnership benefits WITHOUT health insurance because of DOMA? What kind of reality do they live in?” gay fundraiser and activist David Mixner emailed me this morning. “It is like rubbing salt in the wound. I am glad that some barriers will be lifted for Federal Employees but what is the most important benefit needed….health insurance! Good god.”   

The anger isn’t limited to e-mails to bloggers, either. Prominent homosexual lobbyists are boycotting a big time fundraiser by Vice President Joe Biden, as Jake Tapper of ABC News reports on his Political Punch blog (here).

Also, see the Obama “Fraud” and “Fail” posters in the photo at this Politico post (here). In the end, this make up call is about as worthy as one in an athletic contest, which is to say it is not worthy at all. One doesn’t make up an alleged grievance by intentionally harming an innocent party, especially when your original stand is just. As we noted yesterday, surprising as it is, the Obama administration simply is defending the Constitutional powers of the legislative branch, as well as the several states. Whatever his reasons, cynical or otherwise, it is the correct call and requires no make up.

All this proves a point: When the most liberal, “progressive” president in history isn’t moving on the homosexual agenda at the pace its advocates want, how mainstream is their movement? 

Who recently said that marriage between one man and one woman is the “traditional and universally recognized form of marriage”? If you guessed Carrie Prejean, who lost her Miss California crown last week (see Fox News) — after pageant officials said she could keep it — for speaking out in favor of traditional marriage, or some right-wing Christian fanatic you are . . . wrong.

However, if you guessed Tony West — Ding! Ding! Ding! — You win.

Who’s Tony West? He is the United States Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Division and he filed the legal brief defending the federal Defense of Marriage Act in federal court June 11 (see here). The Obama administration, in fact, is asking the federal court to dismiss the case, brought on by a “married” homosexual pair.

Now, major homosexual special interest groups are going ballistic, with a leader of one blasting the president in a personal letter (see Wall Street Journal). Not only that, but the New York Times is steaming mad, too. The poor president can’t get a break. 

In the brief, the administration sounds as right-wing crazy as the 57 percent of Virginians who voted for our Marriage Amendment, unintended consequences and all:

In allowing each State to withhold its recognition of same-sex marriages performed in other jurisdictions, Congress was merely confirming longstanding conflict-of-laws principles in a valid exercise of its express power to settle such questions under the Full Faith and Credit Clause. That Clause ensures that each State retains the authority to decline to apply another State’s law when it conflicts with its own public policies. DOMA is fully consistent with that constitutional principle, as it permits States to experiment with and maintain the exclusivity of their own legitimate public policies — such as whether that State chooses to recognize or reject same-sex marriages. Similarly, in relation to plaintiffs’ purported “right to travel” claim, DOMA simply does not impinge upon anyone’s ability to travel among the States. Again, it merely permits each State to follow its own policy with respect to marriage.

Although the administration says it wants to repeal DOMA legislatively, it also says that while it is still the law, it is constitutional, and must be defended. Admittedly, this position is surprising coming from a president who, as a law professor, said restraints had to be put on the Constitution (hear for yourself) and believes in courts making policy rather than inerpreting the law, but it is refreshing — and correct — nonethesame.

It’s also fun to see liberals disillusioned with their ”anointed one” whom they unceasingly, thoughtlessly adore. A little wedge on the left is never bad.

Now the Obama administration has itself in a pretzel, not only casting doubt on his sincerity on homosexual “rights” (he’s abandoned other promises as well), but establishing a precedent for defending laws it disagrees with by abandoning its advocacy of judicial activism. That said, we doubt it has established a pattern, but will still watch whether the administration continues this intellectual honesty regarding the proper roles of the legislative and judicial branches.