Boehner Announces House Will Defend DOMA in Court

Following a meeting of a bipartisan panel consisting of House Speaker John Boehner, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.), Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Md.), Boehner announced that the House will intervene as a third-party defendant in cases challenging the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).

John_boehner Said Boehner in a statement:

"Today, after consultation with the Bipartisan Leadership Advisory Group, the House General Counsel has been directed to initiate a legal defense of this law. This action by the House will ensure that this law's constitutionality is decided by the courts, rather than by the President unilaterally."

As expected, the vote to defend was 3-2 on the GOP majority majority panel:

"Members of the BLAG (Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group) met for nearly 30 minutes in Speaker Boehner's Capitol Hill office suite to discuss the matter, Hoyer told reporters following the meeting."

You may have missed…
DOMA: Defending the Indefensible [tr]


  1. Paul R says

    I truly hope the earlier story about the GOP screwing itself by continuing to focus on social issues was right, and that this is a distraction for voters. Has he never heard of executive rights? Because Bush/Cheney sure had.

  2. ricky says

    So, let’s see – there are 435 Members of the House – and 5 of those 435 met and 3 decided to focus resources and energy – during this time of economic hardship in the United States – on defending that which does not need defending.

    There is always something both disgusting and fascinating about see cockroaches scurry.

  3. Pete n SFO says

    What a brave, brave man to stand by his principles…

    Oh, I could barely type that with a ‘straight face’!

    Okay, T-baggers, now would be the time for you to rise up and reject this nonsense in favor of less gov’t intervention.

    Crickets… jus’ f’n crickets!

  4. I'm Layla Miller I Know Stuff' says

    The letter of the law versus the spirit of the law

    The letter of the law versus the spirit of the law is an idiomatic antithesis. When one obeys the letter of the law but not the spirit, one is obeying the literal interpretation of the words (the “letter”) of the law, but not the intent of those who wrote the law. Conversely, when one obeys the spirit of the law but not the letter, one is doing what the authors of the law intended, though not adhering to the literal wording.

    “Law” originally referred to legislative statute, but in the idiom may refer to any kind of rule. Intentionally following the letter of the law but not the spirit may be accomplished through exploiting technicalities, loopholes, and ambiguous language. Following the letter of the law but not the spirit is also a tactic used by oppressive governments.

  5. PLAINTOM says

    You gotta love those brave Republicans who claim to cherish American values like life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. The self proclaimed supporters of small government and individual liberty. Those brave patriots who say they want a smaller government which does not meddle in the lives of it’s citizens. Republicans are fradulent bastards and they just signed their own political death warrent.

  6. gayalltheway says

    They have no valid argument to make whatsoever.

    I was hoping that they would defend it because you know that DOMA will be struck down by the SCOTUS.

    Federal government has no business determining what constitutes a civil marriage.

    DOMA is DOOM. Start the countdown.

  7. says

    are they sure they legally can due to division of powers via the 3 branches of gov?

    I’d like to hear the SCOTUS just on this move let alone on DOMA

    It would be funny if SCOTUS says to the repub house members they are not allowed to

  8. Paul R says

    Some of the comments seem way too positive on the views likely to come from the SCOTUS. But no, he can’t really do this. Executive power/privilege is just that, especially when the GOP doesn’t control the entire Congress. He’s just being a dumbass.

    It’s called pandering, and if there’s any justice in the world he’ll deeply regret it.

Leave A Reply