|
Letter: Defense of DOMA not the same as enforcement
Op-Ed · March 09, 2011
I wish to dispute the allegation made by the editor of this paper that the President is derelict in his duty and in violation of his oath of office in directing the Attorney General to suspend defense of the Defense of Marriage Act.
The editor seems to confuse the defense of statutes (commonplace but not constitutionally required) with the enforcement of them (clearly required in Article 2, Section 3).
To be certain, federal employees who are legally married to their same sex partners continue to be denied benefits afforded to their heterosexual married colleagues as required by DOMA.
In fact, to quote from the Attorney General’s letter which is available at www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2011/February/11-ag-223.html: “Notwithstanding this determination, the President has informed me that Section 3 will continue to be enforced by the Executive Branch. To that end, the President has instructed Executive agencies to continue to comply with Section 3 of DOMA, consistent with the Executive’s obligation to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, unless and until Congress repeals Section 3 or the judicial branch renders a definitive verdict against the law’s constitutionality.”
Given this distinction, the straw-man of a President Palin or President Huckabee “ordering federal departments to stop enforcing the recent health care overhaul provisions” that the editor created in his editorial clearly holds no water. The editor acknowledged in his editorial his general support for DOMA, and I would like to definitively declare my support for the equal rights of all people in marriage and all other governmentally recognized areas. However, to quote Daniel Patrick Moynihan, “Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.” And the fact is, this president continues to enforce DOMA.
Respectfully,
Dan Stevenson
West Branch
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
