obitoftheday asks: I consider myself pretty up on politics, social issues, and pop culture...but for the love of all that is holy, who is that woman in the DOMA post? (I know you reblogged but you all seem like smart folks who have all the answers.)
» SFB says: Why, that’s Edith Windsor, the woman who brought the case on DOMA—the one that could see DOMA overturned for good. As it turns out, Chris Geidner, the guy I reblogged (and one of the best journalists in the country on LGBT issues), wrote a really great profile of her a while back. It’s a must-read. — Ernie @ SFB
How can our country, with a President who knows discrimination in his core, how can they continue to uphold DOMA?Vermont resident Frances Herbert • Discussing the issues her wife, Takaka Ueda, is facing. Herbert is legally married to Ueda — a native of Japan and her partner of 13 years — and in shock, after the Department of Homeland Security sent a letter denying Ueda’s request to stay in the country. Ueda moved to the US from Japan in 1999, but is now living in the country illegally and faces deportation. Vermont’s congressional delegation has even stepped in, submitting a letter to the Department of Homeland Security, asking them to reconsider. Now the couple plans to fight the ruling, and the Defense of Marriage Act in general, in hopes of preventing this from happening to anyone else. Think they’ll succeed? source (via • follow)
» Don’t forget, this is taxpayer money, allocated by House Republicans to their legal counsel to defend DOMA in court. It was originally capped at $500,000, but that limit has since been tripled.
For a big law firm with an international reputation like King and Spalding, this could have gotten very ugly for them. This kind of thing could have stuck to them for decades. People no longer want to be associated with this kind of discrimination.Richard Socarides, gay rights advocate • Speaking about legal firm King and Spalding withdrawing from their plan to defend the Defense Of Marriage Act (DOMA) in service of the House GOP. The decision has caused a split within the firm, as Paul Clement, one of the partners involved with the case, has resigned in protest and will continue to work for DOMA’s defense, saying that even unpopular causes deserve legal representation. Socarides disagrees, claiming the law is discriminatory and thus is un-American, and that there’s no merit in defending such a cause. We agree in the moral sense, perhaps, but ultimately Clement is correct — legal representation is a keystone of our system of justice, and even though King and Spalding has every right not to take this case, at some point some lawyer does have to step up, personal beliefs aside. source (via • follow)
The President believes that DOMA is unconstitutional. They are no longer going to be defending the cases in the 1st and 2nd circuits.A so-called anonymous source talking to the National Journal • Explaining what the whole Obama-DOJ-not-defending the Defense of Marriage Act means for current court cases. Let’s be clear, though – the law is still law, but Obama will choose not to have his people take it to court, because he feels that the law will not pass muster. This is not a step he takes lightly, though. Obama also, in a note, told Congress that if they want to defend the statute, they still can. But his folks won’t mess with it. Obama supports repeal of the bill, but the DOJ has defended DOMA in court as recently as January. source (via • follow)