legal arguments

Why the Federal Government Wants to Keep DOMA: Paperwork Is Hard

Forget for a moment that the Justice Department is, by its very purpose, required to defend the laws on the books in court. At yesterday’s Gill et al. v. Office of Personnel Management arguments, GLAD argued, in front of Judge Joseph Tauro on behalf of its 17 plaintiffs argued, that the Defense of Marriage Act is unconstitutional. But while DoJ attorney W. Scott Simpson conceded that even the Obama administration “disagrees with DOMA as a matter of policy and would like to see it repealed,” he maintained such a position “does not affect its constitutionality.” Moreover, keeping the law on the books, Simpson argued, would allow the federal government and its agencies to not have to keep track of which states had legalized gay marriage, and which had not. Here, allow us to help, in case you’re incompetent:

(Pictured, top: GLAD attorney Mary L. Bonauto)

[photo via; image via]