much ado

John Boehner Would Be ‘Very Surprised’ If House Chose Not To Defend DOMA

We’ve been researching all the options that are available to us. We’ll be talking to the members in the next few days about that and I expect we’ll have a decision by the end of the week. … I’d be very surprised if the House didn’t decide that they were going to defend law. … It strikes me as something that’s just as raw politics as anything I’ve seen knowing that a lot of people who believe in DOMA are probably not likely to vote for him and pandering to the other side on this issue.

—House Speaker John Boehner is discussing the “options on the table” about how to handle DoJ’s decision not to defend the constitutionality of DOMA’s Section 3

Get Queerty Daily

Subscribe to Queerty for a daily dose of #politics #barackobama #departmentofjustice stories and more


  • justiceontherocks

    I thought all these lug nuts were mad at Obama for focusing on DOMA instead of fixing the economy. Glad to know he’s changed his mind.

    Of course they’ll defend it. And look very pathetic doing so.

  • Soupy

    I guess that he doesn’t want to discuss the two extramarital affairs that he has had. As long as he continues his attitude towards what he considers immoral, he will have to address that.

  • whatever

    Tea Party Republicans don’t care about social issues and only fiscal ones. ::blank stare::

  • rf

    Let them. 5 federal cases (2 DOMA, 2 DADT, and prop 8) on gay equality last year (there may have been more, or there’s more now) and in all of them the anti-gay euquality side ended up looking like a bunch of mean spirited idiots. Unlike even just 5 years ago, all their ignorant arguments are now going in the permanent court records for the world to see. If nothing else, Obama walking away from DOMA gives the higher courts (federal courts of appeal and SCOTUS) cover to agree with him without looking like ‘activist judges’.

  • robert in NYC

    No. 2. Soupy…yes, what ever happened to those two alledged affairs with lobbyists? The National Inquirer broke the story and remember, they were right on the money with the John Edwards scandal. Its amazing how the mainstream media is not picking this one up, I suspect its been muzzled by Fox et al. I hope it eventually gains traction to highlight the hypocrisy of this scumbag and the entire GOP. So much for family values and the sanctity of marriage.

  • tjr101

    What’s more, the nutcase Steve King from Iowa wants to cut funding to the DoJ so as to force them to defend DOMA.

    Apparently attacking Planned Parenthood and defending DOMA will create jobs and improve the economy. How imaginative?!?!

  • Cam

    The GOP is making a mistake.

    There were two reasons (In my opinion) that they did well last election.

    1. The Left was disenchanted with the DEMS lack of action and was not enthusiastic going into the election. Many stayed home and some only came out because of nuts like Christine O’donnell, Jim Miller and Sharon Angle

    2. The GOP ran on the slogan “Jobs Jobs Jobs” and in fact many came out and said that they were all about jobs and NOT pushing any religious agenda.

    So while I still haven’t seen one jobs bill from the GOP I HAVE seen a bunch of bills on gays, abortion, attacks against planned parenthood and NPR, so I have a feeling going into the election not only will they be dealing with a much more energiezed left, (From the Lame Duck laws passed, and from seeing what the GOP has been doing) but the indipendents who wanted jobs and not a bunch of religion inspired bills cannot be happy about the direction they’ve been going.

    I think Boehner is going to be a 2 year speaker.

  • kernelt

    The president and the DoJ had the right to not defend the law in court, but doesn’t mean they don’t execute the law…

  • reason

    @kernelt: They are still bound to execute the law, but their classification of homosexuality as an immutable characteristic is going to severely weaken arguments to uphold discrimination in court. They have basically conveyed, indirectly, that GBLT are not individuals carrying out immoral behaviors, but a class of people that were born this way that need to be protected due to historic discrimination. Whether they had the right not to defend it is something that will be debated and may result in investigations of the administration initiated in the house. Whatever the outcome the GOP will try to make the admin pay a price for this. The democrats will submit legislation in both chambers to try to repeal DOMA, but it is unlikely that it would get through the GOP packed house.

    My question is can the house unilaterally appoint someone to represent the congress in court, or do they have to have the support of the senate? I would assume that there would have to be monetary compensation involved that may block the house from acting alone. Does anyone know of any cases in the historical record?

  • GetBalance

    If the GLOP doesn’t defend, it will show they are actually looking at the egg-on-face factor and decline. But then that would mean there is actually some intelligence in their midst. Since that thought is even beyond grasping at straws, i expect a perfect throwdown complete with raw and scrambled topped w merange.

  • McMike

    Gee, do you think Obama maybe knows what he’s doing? IMHO, he’s planning on the GOP defending DOMA. They’re going to certify their party as the Party of Hate and it’s going to win Obama another term in office. Go ahead, GOP, make gay rights a focal point in the 2012 election.

    Bring it on.

  • Brian Miller

    This is great news, no matter what happens.

    It’s clear that anti-gay-marriage activists look like MORONS in court, with the rules of evidence, very quickly — to the point where NOM and other parties in the Prop 8 hearings pulled out all the stops to avoid having the trial televised for fear of looking even stupider.

    So if the House opts to defend the law in court, they’ll look like jackasses and the law likely goes down.

    If they opt not to, the law goes down.

    Either way, we win.

Comments are closed.