Legal News

In Wake of Prez?s Punt, Boehner Launches Effort to Defend DOMA

By Ashby Jones

House Speaker John Boehner was none too happy last week when the Obama administration said it would no longer defend the federal Defense of Marriage Act in court.

So on Friday, according to the WSJ’s Evan Perez, Boehner took matters into his own hands, launching an effort to defend DOMA, which bans recognition of same-sex marriages.

For now, DOMA, the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act, known as DOMA, defines marriage as the union of a man and woman. It remains federal law and last week Obama ordered federal agencies to continue abiding by it, even after he declared it unconstitutional last week and told the Justice Department to cease defending the law.

Boehner said he will convene a panel called the Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group that can order the House general counsel's office to bring legal action on behalf of the House.

"It is regrettable that the Obama administration has opened this divisive issue at a time when Americans want their leaders to focus on jobs and the challenges facing our economy. The constitutionality of this law should be determined by the courts — not by the president unilaterally — and this action by the House will ensure the matter is addressed in a manner consistent with our constitution," Boehner said in a statement.

Attorney General Eric Holder, in a Feb 23 letter to Mr. Boehner, said the president ordered federal agencies to observe the law until Congress repeals it or a court decides its constitutionality.

Same-sex marriage is legal in five states and the District of Columbia. Under DOMA, the federal government doesn’t recognize those marriages, meaning people married under those state laws don't enjoy benefits granted to couples by the federal government.

The Obama administration defended DOMA in federal court for two years but said new challenges to the law in New York and Connecticut forced it to take a deeper look. Courts in those states are governed by different legal precedents than other courts that heard earlier challenges, it said.

The administration's review concluded that the law discriminated against a historically marginalized group and failed to meet the high legal bar traditionally applied to such discriminatory laws.

Full post as published by Law Blog - WSJ.com on March 04, 2011 (boomark / email).