Movies Books Music Food Tv Shows Technology Politics Video Games Parenting Fashion Green Living more >

Repealing DOMA (The Defense of Marriage Act)

Stating that the Defense of Marriage Act, which defines marrage as between man and woman, is unconstitutional.

< read all 1 reviews

A Quick Tip by djevoke

  • Feb 24, 2011
  • by
Today, Feb. 23, 2011, marks an important day for human rights. The Obama administration said today that is will no longer defend the constitutionality of a federal law banning recognition of same-sex marriage. Obama, attempting to straddle the fence a bit and not totally alienate himself from the Republicans (methinks it's too late), says that he's still "grappling" with his personal views. However, Mr. President has concluded the Defense of Marriage Act fails to meet a rigorous standard under which courts view with suspicion any laws targeting minority groups who have suffered a history of discrimination. Attorney General Holder wrote a letter to the Speaker of the House, R-Boehner, expressing this monumental point of view reversing decades of Department of Justice's defense of DOMA in court.

It doesn't matter what side you happen to reside on the same-sex marriage issue, this is a monumental day for American law and human rights. I tend to reside on the "love doesn't have a gender" side of the fence. So, I'm incredibly excited about this day.
Was this helpful?
Post a Comment
March 08, 2011
Actually, this is not a thing to celebrate (and I'm really not talking about any position on gay marriage). You can't have the highest elected official (and any of his/her appointments) deciding what laws should and should not be enforced and/or defended in court. Arguably, that's an impeachable offense, if there ever were one, and let me give you an example to support my position. Suppose any other elected official (it doesn't have to be a President) decides defending speed limits is no longer defensible in court (yeah, yeah, don't get me going on how it may or may not be a valid comparison b/c then we could be at this for hours, and I really don't have the energy or interest in that). Every one of us knows that speed limits are the law of the land, and enforcing them saves lives (I think everyone can presume that's correct). So, if an elected official said, "Yeah, we ain't gonna defend those who break that law," would it be acceptable? We choose these people to serve in these roles PREDICATED on the requirement that they enforce the law. Other political commentators have already pointed out "How would you feel if President McCain refused to defend a woman's right to choose?" What Obama and those he's surrounded himself are doing is saying that they're ABOVE the law by choosing which ones they're going to support, despite the fact that the law may or may NOT be on the books. If anything, I'd strongly support the federal government really getting out of what should be states' rights issues, but you can't have the AG saying, "We're not going to defend that." Sorry, folks, but that's just wrong. And, yes, I agree that love shouldn't have a gender. I don't believe the fed should be involved in defining ANY type of love, but you can't have elected officials saying that they're NOT going to enforce/defend the law. That isn't any form of representative democracy I know of. That's political anarchy, and it isn't right. Just my two cents.
March 02, 2011
Great QT! I'm also excited by this news, Sam. It's about time!
About the reviewer
Samantha ()
Ranked #14
I'm a human jukebox that is constantly changing my station depending on my mood!   Feel free to share your passion with me in my communities: Pass the Remote!, Hip Hop Culture, Wedding Planning … more
Consider the Source

Use Trust Points to see how much you can rely on this review.

Your ratings:
rate more to improve this
About this topic


On Feb. 23, 2011- Obama urged the Dept. of Justice to repeal DOMA, calling it unconstitutional. Obama administration said it will no longer defend the constitutionality of a federal law banning recognition of same-sex marriage.The following is a letter from Attorney General Eric Holder to the Speaker Boehner:

Dear Mr. Speaker:

After careful consideration, including review of a recommendation from me, the President of the United States has made the determination that Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act ("DOMA"), 1 U.S.C. § 7, as applied to same-sex couples who are legally married under state law, violates the equal protection component of the Fifth Amendment. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 530D, I am writing to advise you of the Executive Branch's determination and to inform you of the steps the Department will take in two pending DOMA cases to implement that determination.

While the Department has previously defended DOMA against legal challenges involving legally married same-sex couples, recent lawsuits that challenge the constitutionality of DOMA Section 3 have caused the President and the Department to conduct a new examination of the defense of this provision. In particular, in November 2011, plaintiffs filed two new lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of Section 3 of DOMA in jurisdictions without precedent on whether sexual-orientation classifications are subject to rational basis review or whether they must satisfy some form of ...

view wiki



© 2015 Lunch.com, LLC All Rights Reserved
Lunch.com - Relevant reviews by real people.
This is you!
Ranked #
Last login
Member since