Attorney General will not demfd DOMA

In the two years since this Administration took office, the Department of Justice has defended Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act on several occasions in
federal court. Each of those cases evaluating Section 3 was considered in jurisdictions in which binding circuit court precedents hold that laws singling out people
based on sexual orientation, as DOMA does, are constitutional if there is a rational basis for their enactment. While the President opposes DOMA and believes it
should be repealed, the Department has defended it in court because we were able to advance reasonable arguments under that rational basis standard.

Section 3 of DOMA has now been challenged in the Second Circuit, however, which has no established or binding standard for how laws concerning sexual
orientation should be treated. In these cases, the Administration faces for the first time the question of whether laws regarding sexual orientation are subject to the
more permissive standard of review or whether a more rigorous standard, under which laws targeting minority groups with a history of discrimination are viewed
with suspicion by the courts, should apply.

After careful consideration, including a review of my recommendation, the President has concluded that given a number of factors, including a documented history
of discrimination, classifications based on sexual orientation should be subject to a more heightened standard of scrutiny. The President has also concluded that
Section 3 of DOMA, as applied to legally married same-sex couples, fails to meet that standard and is therefore unconstitutional. Given that conclusion, the
President has instructed the Department not to defend the statute in such cases. I fully concur with the President’s determination.

New Citizenship test? Here is Bill Maher's potential test

Obama aid rips white house immigration policy

n a stinging rebuke of the White House, Washington politicians and federal agencies, a former Obama administration official slams in a law journal the U.S. government for its inaction on immigration reform and tougher-than-ever enforcement.

With uncommon candor for a once-public official, Roxana Bacon, a former top counsel for U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, says that the administration — and her erstwhile employer — have shied away from vision and practical leadership on immigration, because of indifference and timidity, respectively. She published her comments in the March issue of Arizona Attorney, the state bar's law journal.



YOu go Roxy!