...

[kyburg]

Yes.

Comments

[nagasvoice.livejournal.com]

Interesting reading, and thanks for the link. I believe that is complicated enough that it's going to lead to some interesting conflicts. The Department will enforce DOMA but will not defend its constitutionality in court, hmmm...

[washuotaku.livejournal.com]

Well, by law, they are required to enforce it. But they are basically saying they will show-up to court, give a brief mention why they are there and just sit there. It also opens up the cases to be defended by other organizations; similar to what is happening in California where other groups are defending the law and not the state.

In the short term, it doesn't change anything. However, it gives a greater chance for judges now to strike-down the law and push it faster towards the Supreme Court. But when that happens (if it happens) to be overturn, then you got the issue where a majority of states have laws written in the constitution banning gay marriage; those will then have to be pushed through court (more years) unless the federal government passes a law that allows gay marriage.

All in all, it's a mix bag of candy and glass.

[nagasvoice.livejournal.com]

Thank you, I like that explanation!