President Obama decided Feb. 23 that the Justice Department would no longer defend the Defense of Marriage Act, a federal ban on same-sex marriage. His belief that the act is unconstitutional correctly led him to make this decision.Because Obama doesn’t have the power to repeal the law, deciding not to defend it was a logical way to demonstrate the growing acceptance of same-sex marriages, moving the country in the right direction.
Recently there’s been an increase in support for same-sex marriage among American citizens. As of 2010, 42 percent of Americans support same-sex marriage, a 12 percent increase from 2004, according to a study by Pew Research Center. Additionally, the Maryland Senate passed a same-sex marriage law Feb. 24.
It seems impractical to do anything other than move forward in the direction of same-sex marriage legalization. Holding onto tradition does nothing but hinder inevitable progress.
The U.S. is based on equal opportunity, yet DOMA denies people of certain sexual orientations the right to marriage as well as other rights like employment, medical and housing benefits. Denying a group of citizens these rights doesn’t uphold American values.
By refusing to defend DOMA in federal courts, Obama took a substantial step towards a national legalization of same-sex marriage. Next, Congress should repeal DOMA for good.
Anon • May 15, 2011 at 9:37 pm
Section 3 of DOMA is currently being challenged in court. Since it is a federal law, the Obama administration and the Attorney General are the parties that would defend it. On February 23, AG Holder announced that the DOJ would no longer be defending Section 3 of DOMA from challenges to its Constitutionality. That is perfectly within his right.
DOMA is not a ban on same sex marriage, per se. Section 3 – which the Obama administration is no longer defending – defines marriage (at the federal level) as between a man and a woman. This has little impact on who can marry, as no one gets married at the federal level, but does matter for issues such as marriage benefits.
However, states are still free to allow (or disallow) same sex marriage. Further, Section 2 of DOMA permits states not to recognize same sex marriages that were performed in other states.
Lady Luck • Mar 30, 2011 at 9:56 am
In response to those who object to the decision because of the 42% poll —
The citizens of the United States should direct political decisions to an extent, yes. However, preventing the tyranny of the majority from ruling politics is a vital function of our government. Plessy vs. Fergusson was well-received in its time, after all. A 68% majority is substantial, but no majority justifies the creation and enforcement of an unjust law.
I’m personally glad that there’s at least some action being taken against DOMA, even while Obama is facing so much criticism. If and when I fall in love, I want to be able to marry without being forced to move to a new state.
A. Geek • Mar 28, 2011 at 11:42 pm
Failing to uphold the law may sound unconstitutional but it is a time-tested technique by the Executive. Checks and balances exist: If the Legislature feels that Obama isn’t enforcing a necessary law, they have all sorts of devices at their disposal – from hearings all the way to impeachment. Since the Legislature hasn’t done these things, it’s essentially shown that it is in agreement with Obama here.
average student • Mar 28, 2011 at 8:23 am
im not a homophobe or a hick. for the most part i support Obama and his policies. My problem this specific decision is that it is completley unconstitutiniol because it violates all semblance of checks and balances. Just because Obama personally thinks a law is unconstititniol does not mean he can stop enforcing regarldeless of what the law says. Also ur guy”s assumption that gay marrige is a widley held public movement that only the “homophobes” and “hicks” oppose is disatrously misfounded. 26 states have laws outlawing gay marrige. Last time i checked 26 is a majority. Only 42% is not. By calling the majority of our country hicks ur insulting everyone including urself.
Someone • Mar 22, 2011 at 8:55 am
Oh please, people. Gay marriage is going to be legal sooner or later, and everyone that’s against can go back to the Hicks. Is Obama doing a lot? No, but that’s because other things have popped up for him and the country, and by the way I’m not a big Obama fan.
John Connelly • Mar 21, 2011 at 7:03 pm
I wish all these homophobes would just deal with the fact that there are gay people and actually rationalize their decisions. By the way, whether or not this is violating checks and balances doesn’t matter. That’s not the point. The point is that we have a president that is actually taking a step towards allowing gay marriage
Irrelevant • Mar 11, 2011 at 12:32 pm
I believe our political system is a majoritarian one. 42% of the population polling that they believe so by no means indicates that same-sex marriage should be legalized. Where’s the source for this poll anyways? There’s quite a disparity between a Gallup poll and a reddit poll.
Yes, Maryland approved that law in the state Senate. But it hasn’t passed the House. Either way, it doesn’t matter, because a state law is very different from a national one; what do Californians care what we pass? On what grounds should our opinions be imposed on the rest of the nation’s?
When the nation is ready for same-sex marriage, it will pass it.
“It seems impractical”? “Hinders inevitable progress”? “The U.S. is based on equal opportunity”? Such broad statements and strong support isn’t really convincing me.
No, Obama has not taken a substantial step. In fact, he really hasn’t done much at all regarding same-sex marriage. He doesn’t want to spend political currency fighting over an issue that will likely enrage evangelical conservatives, and he wants to be seen as doing something to appease his liberal base. But he really isn’t DOING anything. If he wanted to fight for same-sex marriage, he would.
Above Average Student • Mar 10, 2011 at 12:17 pm
If I remember correctly when Andrew Jackson chose not to enforce something he was supposed to a whole lot of Native Americans paid the price. While I whole-heartedly support gay marriage, I think that this method is not the right way for Obama to show his support, because it sets a bad precedent that others in the future might choose to follow.
jeffries • Mar 7, 2011 at 6:19 pm
Please excuse my snide comment, but this is not just a question of checks and balances. Overturning the ban on gay marriage is a question of civil rights. When it comes to civil rights, rights that every individual should have, it should NOT be left up to the states. Having said that, Maryland is one step away from making gay marriage legal (hurrah!). Hopefully we won’t have to wait for a state by state process, and marriage for same-sex couples can be available to all American citizens, regardless of which state they call home.
average student • Mar 7, 2011 at 9:36 am
Im not against gay marrige but this is the wrong thing to do. This is not a step in the right direction its a step towards a dictatorship. The constution gives the judicial not the exucutive to declare a law unconstitutiniol. Just cause Obama dosnt like this perfectly legal law doeas not give him the right to stop enforcing it which is the exucutive branches duty. Also author read DOMA actually it does not say gays dont have the right to marry. It only says that the only federal involvement in any marrige is for the producement of children. The decision of gay marrige is something that therefore left up to the states. 26 states, majority, have laws specificly outlawing gay marrige and only 8 states at any one time had have laws for marrige. Also every time a gay marrige resolution has been put to a popular vote it has lost save once. Author Pew is also an incredibly biased thinktank and not a trustworthy source. Last time i checked 42% is not a majority and thankfully we live in a democracy with majority rule. With this move Obama is going against the Constitution and the majority of the country and it dosnt matter if he thinks its right its the wrong thing to do.