GOP bails out on defending marriage
Jul 21, 2013 5:58:56 GMT -5
Post by popcorn on Jul 21, 2013 5:58:56 GMT -5
GOP bails out on defending marriage 
The Republican leaders in the House of Representatives are no longer planning to defend traditional marriage at the federal level. By their own admission in a case challenging the definition of gspouseh as applied to veteransf benefits, lawyers for the House Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group, or BLAG, controlled by House Republicans, announced Thursday they will gno longer defendh the Defense of Marriage Act, or DOMA, in federal court. Documents hosted by BuzzFeed in the case of McLaughlin v. Panetta reveal GOP House attorneys essentially believe the Supreme Court has settled the issue. gThe Windsor decision necessarily resolves the issue of DOMA Section 3Œs constitutionality in this case,h BLAG attorneys wrote. gWhile the question of whether 38 U.S.C. ˜ 101(3), (31) is constitutional remains open, the House has determined, in light of the Supreme Courtfs opinion in Windsor, that it no longer will defend that statute. gAccordingly,h the lawyers filed, gthe House now seeks leave to withdraw as a party defendant.h The Windsor case refers to last monthfs ruling in which the Supreme Court by 5-4 vote held Section 3 of DOMA to be unconstitutional under the Due Process Clause.
More
www.wnd.com/2013/07/gop-bails-out-on-defending-marriage/
The Republican leaders in the House of Representatives are no longer planning to defend traditional marriage at the federal level. By their own admission in a case challenging the definition of gspouseh as applied to veteransf benefits, lawyers for the House Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group, or BLAG, controlled by House Republicans, announced Thursday they will gno longer defendh the Defense of Marriage Act, or DOMA, in federal court. Documents hosted by BuzzFeed in the case of McLaughlin v. Panetta reveal GOP House attorneys essentially believe the Supreme Court has settled the issue. gThe Windsor decision necessarily resolves the issue of DOMA Section 3Œs constitutionality in this case,h BLAG attorneys wrote. gWhile the question of whether 38 U.S.C. ˜ 101(3), (31) is constitutional remains open, the House has determined, in light of the Supreme Courtfs opinion in Windsor, that it no longer will defend that statute. gAccordingly,h the lawyers filed, gthe House now seeks leave to withdraw as a party defendant.h The Windsor case refers to last monthfs ruling in which the Supreme Court by 5-4 vote held Section 3 of DOMA to be unconstitutional under the Due Process Clause.
More
www.wnd.com/2013/07/gop-bails-out-on-defending-marriage/