News
Rep. Barney Frank Defends Obama’s Pro-DOMA Briefby Kilian MelloyThursday Jun 18, 2009 In the wake of GLBT outrage over a Justice Department brief submitted to a court where a federal lawsuit has been filed to challenge the anti-gay Defense of Marriage Act from 1996, openly gay Massachusetts representative barney Frank, initially critical of the brief--which drew comparisons between same-sex couples and incestuous marriages--has reversed course and offered his support for the brief.
A June 17 article at AmericaBlog reported that although Frank had decried the bill that morning, the Congressman had changed his tune later the same day.
Frank claimed that he had come out against the brief before reading its content, but then changed his mind after reviewing the document.
After a silence of several days’ duration after the brief’s filing, Frank stated, "I think the administration made a big mistake. The wording they used was inappropriate."
The Defense of Marriage Act, or DOMA, makes it possible for some states to ignore marriages bestowed in other states where marriage equality is legal, despite the "full faith and credit" clause of the U.S. Constitution.
DOMA also requires the federal government to withhold recognition of same-sex families’ legal status, even if they are married and reside in states that extend marriage equality.
The suit against DOMA was brought by a married male couple who reside in California. Though a ballot initiative in that state rescinded marriage rights for gay and lesbian families via popular vote last year, the state’s Supreme Court--which upheld the ballot initiative--declared that families that had married during the time when marriage equality was still legal in California would remain wed and not be forced into divorce by the state.
The Department of Justice submitted the brief to the court in support of DOMA as a matter of tradition, according to a government spokesperson, who said that typically the Justice Department supports existing laws.
However, AmericaBlog noted that on several occasions, the administrations of past presidents had actually submitted briefs against existing laws in court cases.
The brief, which AmericaBlog reported was co-written by a Mormon staffer, W. Scott Simpson, Senior Trial Counsel for the Justice Department who was retained from the Bush administration, offered several points of argument in support of DOMA with which GLBT leaders have taken issue. Most inflammatory is the comparison between marriage equality and marriage between an adult and a minor, and a reference to a court case in which an uncle and his niece, though legally married abroad, were not permitted to remain married in the U.S.
Frank’s initial statement added, "I’ve been in touch with the White House and I’m hoping the president will make clear these were not his views."
But after reportedly meeting with Obama, it was Rep. Frank whose views had changed. The author of the June 17 AmericaBlog article, John Aravosis, accused the president of pressuring Frank into changing his public statement, writing, "Of course, I don’t believe Frank for a minute - he read the brief, but the president got him to recant."
Aravosis went on to assert, "Barney’s release [reversing his position on the brief] sounds as if it were written by the White House.
"Their talking points are all through it, including the bizarre notion that somehow Obama would be as bad as George Bush if he opposed DOMA in court. (Repeating the lie that presidents never oppose existing legislation in court.)"
Aravosis noted that he and another writer had "already debunked that lie with the example of four court cases in which Reagan, Bush Sr, Clinton and Bush Jr. all opposed existing law.
"And what’s more, we published an essay by former senior Clinton White House official Richard Socarides explaining exactly how the president goes about telling the DOJ to oppose existing law in court. It’s not debatable, it’s what actually happens in the Oval office, and it’s not illegal--it’s a fact."
The article quoted from Frank’s release: "I think it is unwise for liberals like myself, who were consistently critical of President Bush’s refusal to abide by the law in cases where he disagreed with it to now object when President Obama refuses to follow the Bush example."
Aravosis responded, "No, Barney, what happened during the Bush administration is that Democrats of good conscience sold their constituents out for fear of speaking up against a president who was powerful and wrong.
"So yes, the current situation does bear a striking resemblance."
Though President Obama had spoken out as a candidate against DOMA as a form of discrimination against gay and lesbian families, Aravosis pointed out that, "Obama didn’t say he disagrees politically with DOMA."
Added Aravosis, "So now, according to our hero in congress, our civil rights are just ’politics’--and we really don’t want our president arguing in favor of our civil rights in court."
Aravosis went on to say, "We are on our own folks. The Democratic party has abandoned us."
Aravosis’ comments seemed to reflect the mood of some among the GLBT leadership, which has grown increasingly restless as the Obama administration remains largely inactive and quiet about GLBT issues. Indeed, the Justice Department brief, seen as unnecessarily homophobic and inflammatory, may have pushed many in the GLBT community past a political tipping point.
The Obama administration--in a move some opined was calculated to soothe GLBT Americans--had announced that there would be an expansion of benefits for the same-sex partners of federal employees, but those provisions were limited and made through a presidential directive rather than through a more permanent executive order.
Though President Obama spoke out on a number of GLBT issues, including DOMA, civil unions, and the military’s policy against openly gay servicemembers, the administration has moved cautiously when it has taken action at all.
In the case of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, the White House has indicated that the president prefers for the ban on openly gay troops to be addressed legislatively. The Senate, however, has indicated that it is unwilling to take the lead in any such legislative battle.
Kilian Melloy reviews media, conducts interviews, and writes commentary for EDGEBoston, where he also serves as Assistant Arts Editor.
|
|
|
Email
Print
Share