Obama Administration: DOMA, Anti-Gay Marriage Law, Unfair

AP -- The Obama administration filed court papers Monday claiming a federal marriage law discriminates against gays, even as government lawyers continued to defend it.

Justice Department lawyers are seeking to dismiss a suit brought by a gay California couple challenging the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act. The administration's response to the case has angered gay activists who see it as backtracking on campaign promises made by Barack Obama last year.

In court papers, the administration said it supports repeal of the law.

Yet the same filing says the Justice Department will defend the statute in this case because a reasonable argument can be made that the law is constitutional.

The government's previous filing in the case angered gay rights activists who supported Obama's candidacy in part because of his pledge to move forward on repealing the law and the "don't ask, don't tell" policy that prevents gays from serving openly in the military.

"The administration believes the Defense of Marriage Act is discriminatory and should be repealed," said Justice Department spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler, because it prevents equal rights and benefits.

The department is obligated "to defend federal statutes when they are challenged in court. The Justice Department cannot pick and choose which federal laws it will defend based on any one administration's policy preferences," Schmaler added.

The law, often called DOMA, denies federal recognition of gay marriage and gives states the right to refuse to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states.

"DOMA reflects a cautiously limited response to society's still-evolving understanding of the institution of marriage," according to the filing by Assistant Attorney General Tony West.

The administration also disavowed past arguments made by conservatives that DOMA protects children by defining marriage as between a man and a woman.

"The United States does not believe that DOMA is rationally related to any legitimate government interests in procreation and child-rearing and is therefore not relying upon any such interests to defend DOMA's constitutionality," lawyers argued in the filing.

Obama has pledged to work to repeal the law.

Monday's court filing was in response to a lawsuit by Arthur Smelt and Christopher Hammer, who are challenging the federal law, which prevents couples in states that recognize same-sex unions from securing Social Security spousal benefits, filing joint taxes and benefiting from other federal rights connected to marriage.

Justice lawyers have argued that the act is constitutional and contend that awarding federal marriage benefits to gays would infringe on the rights of taxpayers in the 30 states that specifically prohibit same-sex marriages.

Earlier this year, Massachusetts became the first state to challenge the law in court.

Get HuffPost Politics On Facebook and Twitter!

Comments

[thepoliticalcat]

03:58 PM on 08/18/2009

I just want to see the faces of those who complained that "Obama compared gay people to pedophiles," and all that other nonsense. People, you have a President who respects the rule of law. Every single government office is riddled with Bush moles. It will take time to get rid of them all in a way that is fair and legal and obeys the law. In the meantime, until and unless YOUR Congresscritters write new legislation, the Courts are the proper avenue in which to decide the scope of existing legislation. Let's find the Bush moles, expose them, and pressure the Government to get rid of them. Let's work on our State representatives to give us our rights. And let's force our federal Congresscritters to legislate our right to equal treatment. Let's stop expecting the President to issue orders by fiat and signing statement like the last bunch of nincompoops and incompetents did.

[20yearnavyvet]

02:32 AM on 08/18/2009

So, to all of those who are screaming about how I do not deserve to have the same rights and priveleges with my partner (even after having served this nation for 20-years in the military and yes, I'm gay), are you the same ones who are screaming about the government takeover of healthcare, how the government needs to stay out of your lives because the Constitution says so, that this is America and you are free to do as you please, that the government has no right to try to regulate your life, that the government has no right to make your personal decisions for you??

Because that's what I'm saying too.

[Barbara Saunders]

03:14 AM on 08/18/2009

I am pro-same-sex marriage. But this argument doesn't make sense. Government cannot marry people and "stay out of their lives" at the same time. Allowing anyone to marry IS government in people's lives.

[marxmarv]

03:47 AM on 08/18/2009

The churches have been marrying people on their own for centuries. Providing legal status based upon a religious rite is the intrusion.

[20yearnavyvet]

04:17 AM on 08/18/2009

Actually, I believe that churches should be allowed to decide for themselves who they will or will not marry. I honestly believe that the government, for all intents and purposes, should recognize only civil unions whether same-sex or opposite sex. Get married, get a civil union and then register with whomever it is you register your marriage license with as a civil union. Period. All the rights and priveleges have been granted to married couples would then be available to all, regardless.

My previous argument was for all of those who would deny me the rights and priveleges afforded heterosexual couples simply because my partner and I are both male. I am no less deserving as a citizen of this country.

[spoiledtcangel]

02:07 PM on 08/18/2009

Exactly, for all that are opposed do you even think about why your opposed to same sex marriage, why do you care so much are you going to pay into their health insurance? Their Life Insurance? 401k? Adoption Costs? For their wedding? If you like it or not what will it change, besides having the privliges we have to say we are married legally, heck the government doesnt pay for any of the benefits we have as a Married Couple WE do, they will still live together and have families, go to work, come home to each other all while not bothering you in your face just living their normal lives, so what is the big problem?
Did you even read NavyVets post he has served our country for 20 Years, thats 20 years of dedicating his life and putting it on the line so YOU the people who are opposed to Gay marriages can sleep at night but he can't get married, how fair is that what have you done for this country that was so special you get to decide what he can and can not do?
Not to mention the government being against it ummmm do you seriously believe that EVERY single government employee is straight because if you do your definately living in a fictional world.

[mercury613]

02:19 PM on 08/18/2009

"Exactly, for all that are opposed do you even think about why your opposed to same sex marriage, why do you care so much are you going to pay into their health insurance?"

Because as soon as it's not OK for gay and lesbian people to be demonized, the people of whom you speak will have no one to scapegoat, no one to whom they can feel morally superior.

And that scares them senseless.

[Probus]

02:14 AM on 08/18/2009

I can't wait to see the repeal of DADT and DOMA. Both laws discriminate against gay Americans and should be replaced with laws that allow gays to openly serve in our military and allow gays to marry legally and be afforded all the rights and privileges heterosexual couples get.

[spoiledtcangel]

02:02 AM on 08/18/2009

Ok first off Ill start by saying I am a heterosexual catholic female married to a wonderful man but I support gay rights entirely, I believe they should have all the benefits me and my husband have as a legally married couple, to deny that just because they are the same sex its ridiculous. Also why does everyone care so much your not in bed with them, they can adopt children and many have adopted children that have been given up for adoption or taken away by family services because the heterosexual couple can not raise them or are unfit to raise them.
I have seen posts on abuse, divorce and sex in public seriously so as long as its just heteros doing these things their all fine i suppose because news flash ALL sexual orientations do these things!!! The people who write these things are the people to blame for some who do not want to expose their sexual preferences to not be judged so they choose to live a lie and live miserable due to it, no one should have to live like that.
As for Obama going back on his campaign promises many who are involved in Gay Rights will be changing their votes come 2012 if this happens and sorry to tell all of you who are, what do they call it "Homophobic" , Gay people Have a bigger support system than most of you may think and that will be a big voting change.

[20yearnavyvet]

02:17 AM on 08/18/2009

Thank you.

[CoconutLime]

03:30 AM on 08/18/2009

If you support gay rights then you are going against the teachings of your Roman Catholic Church. You can't have it both ways.

[marxmarv]

03:50 AM on 08/18/2009

Clearly the Church is aware it's lost its power over the laity; instead of going into the good night they're skipping over the laity and going direct to government to demand legislation in line with their doctrines.

Church? For-profit corporation? Functionally speaking, is there any difference?

[MelRoy]

08:25 AM on 08/18/2009

The Roman Catholic Church taught me that everything in the Bible is true, including the part about the sun and universe revolving around the Earth, a 900 year old man, a guy marrying a gorilla, another guy being in the belly of a whale for a while before emerging unscathed, Mary being an "immaculate conception" (I mean, a virgin birth is enough of a stretch), oh and let's not forget how Noah managed to track down a pair of every living animal on Earth, fit them all on to a 200 foot boat and keep the carnivores from eating the omnivores. The Roman Catholic Church, in order to embrace and include me and let me take the sacrament, forced me to say I believed all of this unquestioningly. When I refused because even at age 8 I knew that most of the Bible is fantastical and illogical BS, the nuns finally conceded and advised me to "just say the words and get it over with".

What do you believe?

[MelRoy]

01:49 AM on 08/18/2009

Why are you all talking about sex and anatomy? I thought this was supposed to be about marriage, not sex.

[Sepulchre]

10:43 PM on 08/18/2009

The opposition seems facinated with it. So when they post I reply to correct them. If they want to use it as part of their arument they least they can do is get it correct (which usually destroys the point they were trying to manufacture).

[Sion Shankel]

01:27 AM on 08/18/2009

Yes, its a sign you are losing the argument when you have to call someone a nitwit. LOL.. so gay's can't have children? I wonder how my lesbian friend just had one? She appeared preggers to me and she had a 69 hours of labor but perhaps that was just rumor and the baby really was stolen from the neighbors' cabbage patch?

Do gay and bisexual people in homosexual relationships have no genitals, sperm, ovaries, uterus?

There are many straights that can't breed with their own bodies with their hetro partners too. Gays all can avail themselves of the EXACT same fertility treatments or adoption options as straight people do. I know of several gay couples that just fornicated with an opposite friend who later was the uncle or aunt in a healthy extended family to the child.

[rishi851]

12:45 AM on 08/18/2009

This is way OT but a bit related so Ill put it here.....
Are women in general more accepting,more liberal and as a result better rounded individuals?
I have noticed that many girls in general have no qualms what so ever with a person's sexuality-They readily except Gays,Lesbians and any one deemed different and I say this from witnessing stuff in my school.Guys usually had a problem but Girls were chilled.Even on TV shows and real life I hardly know women who are not racist,homophobic or degrading to others the way men are....Why is it?
Is it because they relate well to gays(shoppin,gossiping,interests)-No this is stereotype
Is it because they simply know how to hide better?
I think they are a bit more rational than most men who can get a bit Hot-headed.

[factotem]

01:20 AM on 08/18/2009

Guys are taught to perform "masculinity," and the poor, nervous things overperform homophobia to appear to be the straightest!!
Did bu.tts.ex come up in your conversation? Best to overdo your jokes and anxiety so noone thinks you want to try it. It's not strength. It's being an outward focused wimp. Pathetic,

[marxmarv]

03:53 AM on 08/18/2009

The only thing that can possibly make me believe women should NOT be running things are radfem fundies.

[Jompa]

12:29 AM on 08/18/2009

Thank you for participating!
(study conducted by )
Gay and Lesbian Medical Association (GLMA)

[DialectDerelict]

12:23 AM on 08/18/2009

This is disgusting. All of you that proclaim GOD as your maker and your light constantly refuse to follow your own GOD's creeds. Oh you judge people? Yeah, your GOD says you're not supposed to. Congratulations. You're enlightened now.

[Jompa]

12:11 AM on 08/18/2009

It appears to be a unhealthy lifestyle.

1) Studies shows that homosexual acts are physically harmful because they disregard human anatomy and function - tissue injury, organ malfunction, and infectious diseases.

2)Studies shows that, there is an increased incidence of drug/or alcohol dependency, compulsive sexual behaviour, anxiety, depression, and suicide.

3)Studies shows that 8% of homosexual men and 7% of homosexual women had relationships lasting more than 3 years. In addition, only 13% exclusivity was found in homosexual couples that had been together for less than one year.

4)Studies show that gay life expectancy is 20 years shorter than the hetrosexual life expectancy.

[WhereIsTheTruth]

09:08 PM on 08/21/2009

1) Heterosexual sex acts can likewise be physically harmful - straight people have oral and anal sex, too. STDs/STIs can be transmitted in male/female couplings. It has been my observation that straight couples engaging in sexual activity are often primarily concerned with pregnancy and will bypass use of condoms if the woman is on the pill or some other form of birth control.

2) Studies also show societal repression, bullying, religious condemnation and other negative feedback can lead to "increased incidence of drug/or alcohol dependency, compulsive sexual behaviour, anxiety, depression, and suicide."

3) How is relationship defined? Since they're not likely married, this may count time they're dating, not necessarily living together in a long-term, committed, legally sanctioned relationship. How many heterosexual couples are exclusive in the first year of dating?

4) This is based upon data collected in the 80s and early 90s. Those that conducted the study knew the data was limited in its scope and would be of limited statistical use. The topic was revisited in 2001 and it was determined that, "if we were to repeat this analysis today the life expectancy of gay and bisexual men would be greatly improved." The authors also clarified that their data was intended to be used by health planners in developing means to deal with the prevalence of HIV/AIDS, not "homophobic groups [that] appear more interested in restricting the human rights of gay and bisexuals." (International Journal of Epidemiology 2001;30:1499)

[margent7]

11:58 PM on 08/17/2009

I personally don't see what getting married will do for you. Pretty soon every state will have protections in place anyways. But it is inevetible that it will become law. So what I say. I dont see thta it will really change anything other than a way for splitting the mutual resources when 1/2 get divorced like all marriages do. Thats why I am asking if ti may lend itself to some not feeling the need to act as they do. Basically in your face.

[CoconutLime]

12:03 AM on 08/18/2009

I have read many news stories of gay-on-gay physical abuse within serious relationships. The amount of abuse is astounding.

[margent7]

12:05 AM on 08/18/2009

People are abusive to each other. would that high percentage be reduced if they could actually get married?

[LiberalChrisFromEurope]

12:08 AM on 08/18/2009

Oh, I have read about these false stories and junk science on right-wing evangelical media.

[LiberalChrisFromEurope]

12:05 AM on 08/18/2009

Without DOMA, you need only one state with gay marriage and the rights would be available in every state.

[margent7]

12:09 AM on 08/18/2009

I think the point of DOMA is that it is a states rights thing, I kind of agree that this type of thing shouldnt be given to the states. If not then you don't get the chance at dialogue. Without that people just close their shutters and society is segregated even more.

[margent7]

12:10 AM on 08/18/2009

I meant 'should'

[AmericCanuck]

11:51 PM on 08/17/2009

iI'm a card carrying libruhl for sure, but I'm kinda getting sick of looking at that pic.

Anybody with me?

[w0rld0fw0rcraft]

11:47 PM on 08/17/2009

the picture made me ill. definitely not my kind of thing.

[LiberalChrisFromEurope]

11:49 PM on 08/17/2009

Perhaps you played too much in your online game?

[mercury613]

11:50 PM on 08/17/2009

If that was really the case, you wouldn't feel the need to make a post about it.

[margent7]

11:36 PM on 08/17/2009

You know, I am just trying to have a conversation about some of the things that confuse me about the homosexual community. How in the world can the chasm between straights and gays ever be closed if the response is always defensive?

[BlueMominaRedState]

11:39 PM on 08/17/2009

Since I am a heterosexual woman my responses are not "defensive."

They are legitimate questions about your reactions to the homosexuals. If you have serious questions and aren't simply trying to stir the pot or air your prejudices, I will suggest this is not the proper forum for garnering answers. You might try asking a homosexual person instead.

[LiberalChrisFromEurope]

11:46 PM on 08/17/2009

He obviously just wants to stir up.

[margent7]

11:54 PM on 08/17/2009

Since there are some here already I would like to have some dialogue. Don't get the chance much. Hard to understand what you don't get to see.

[JumpDownTurnAround]

11:39 PM on 08/17/2009

I tried to answer below, it took me awhile but I tried to answer it honestly from my point of view.

[margent7]

11:44 PM on 08/17/2009

It is difficult to have this kind of conversation with a real live person. Things get twisted. I am confused a little at the vitriol I see on both sides of this issue. We are humans and should be treated as such. Just because we disagree shouldnt turn us ugly.
I have a hard time justifying to myself the behaviour of marching down the street and displaying your wares the way some do at parades and I was just wondering if maybe national legitamacy would change some of that?

[margent7]

11:46 PM on 08/17/2009

It is difficult to have this kind of conversation with a real live person.

Things get twisted. I am confused a little at the vitriol I see on both sides of this issue.

We are humans and should be treated as such. Just because we disagree shouldnt turn us ugly.

I have a hard time justifying to myself the behaviour of marching down the street and displaying your wares the way some do at parades and I was just wondering if maybe national legitamacy would change some of that?

[margent7]

11:18 PM on 08/17/2009

If gays are allowed to get married throughout the US of A, someday that will be a reallity, Do you think that will start toning down their propensity at flamboyance and start joining the mainstream.

[JumpDownTurnAround]

11:21 PM on 08/17/2009

If I say YES, then will you vote in favor of it?

[margent7]

11:25 PM on 08/17/2009

I happen to think that is some of the community of gays way to deal with being on the fringe so to speak. Being and acting ridiculous, attracting attention. Basically looking stupid and scary to some. Kind of like a blow to the face since you wont deal with me realistically. Do you think that will change to a degree with more of a semblance of legitamacy

[margent7]

11:27 PM on 08/17/2009

I happen to think that is some of the community of ga__ys way to deal with being on the fringe so to speak.

Being and acting ridiculous, attracting attention.

Basically looking stupid and scary to some.

Kind of like a blow to the face since you wont deal with me realistically.

Do you think that will change to a degree with more of a semblance of legitemacy

[BlueMominaRedState]

11:23 PM on 08/17/2009

Flamboyance? Do you mean public displays of affection? Is it only "flamboyance" if it isn't a man and woman?

[CoconutLime]

11:25 PM on 08/17/2009

No. Flamboyance is when a gay man walks down the street like a pansy.

[margent7]

11:26 PM on 08/17/2009

In the sense of trying to make people uncomfortable with your difference.