Posted on 02/23/2011 1:00:00 PM PST by Recovering_Democrat
In a bold, principled, and unexpected move, the administration — led by Obama himself — has determined that the gay-marriage banning Defense of Marriage Act "violates the equal protection component of the Fifth Amendment" and will no longer defend it in court.
(Excerpt) Read more at rollingstone.com ...
Recall that Padilla was taken into custody when he arrived in Chicago on a plane from Pakistan in 2002. He was arrested on suspicion of planning a dirty bomb attack on the U.S. and transferred to the Navy brig in Charleston, S.C. -- where he remains to this day.
He has never been charged with any crime -- evidently because a trial would require the revelation of secret intelligence data. You can argue his legal status under the circumstances -- as he has been allowed to do.
Lawyers from Eric Holdeer's firm have filed suits against the federal government and George W. Bush and Donald Rumsfeld, personally.
Obama's decision means that the federal government will no longer spend any money on Bush's and Rumsfeld's behalf. They will be required to defend themselves against Padilla's suits in court.
It seems apparent that the Obama administration intends to intentionally provoke a constitutional crisis -- attacking the judicial branch by their continued advancement of Obamacare, attacking the states by their participation in the Wisconsin protests, attacking Congress by their failure to defend DOMA...and attacking prior executives by this unconscionable move.
Not to mention their insistence on governing against the will of the people...
I agree the president has the right to declare a federal act unconstitutional. But that also doesn’t mean anything cause its the States not the Federal government who are the judge in this case.
It is the States that should decide weather not they have such a thing known as a marriage between 2 people of the same Sex.
Simply put Texas is incapable of recognizing the abominations declared in Massachusetts as Texas has no equivalent abomination.
All hail King Obama. We are no longer a nation of laws, but a nation of political correctness ,as measured by the Kings tyrannical foot.
King Obama! Has a certain ring to it!
No. The House will bring up and vote on the articles of impeachemnt, i.e. the charges against the president. If a majority of the House votes to impeach, the articles move to the Senate where a trial of sorts is held with the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court presiding. If 2/3 of the Senators present (assuming they have a quorum, i.e. 51 members present) vote “guilty”, the president is immediately removed from office and the VP is sworn in as president.
Beck is mostly ok with me....
Today, people in general just piss me off....
Nothing personal...
Have a good one...
My personal belief is this; the Rapture takes place, all the world is in chaos, and finally the demonic forces have free reign upon the earth.
The USA finally becomes the degenerate nation the liberals want it to be. Because a nation that was so blessed by God has turned its back completely to him, He finally judges her and judges her ferociously. The New Madrid Fault, the San Andreas Fault and the Yellowstone cauldron are all triggered supernaturally (Rev 6:14, "And the heaven departed as a scroll when it is rolled together; and every mountain and island were moved out of their places."). The USA and its population are almost totally wiped out and once great shining city on the hill is no more.
I sincerely hope I'm wrong, especially for my kid's sake, but I see no way out of this impending judgment. Look in the Old Testament and see what God promised to do to the nations that came against Israel and Judah and also became degenerate. Every single one of them were destroyed. The same principle holds true now.
The 2012 election? Forget about them, he will declare them unconstitutional and deemhimself the winner.
The way things are going, I would not plan on there being an election in 2012.
Ach! You got that right.
Just what else can the nobama do to piss-off normal Citizens. This is becoming like a novel written while high on LSD and sniffing lines of coke. Truly...we have entered Bizarro World.
The “Just One Minute” blog points out that Team Obama and Holder’s decision regarding DOMA has ramifications in other areas:
To paraphrase JOM, “President Palin will have no obligation to defend ObamaCare in Court,” which means it will fail any challenge brought. Hahahahaha.
I agree wholeheartedly.
However, nothing compels a POTUS to defend any law or appeal an adverse ruling with this exception: "Support and Defend the Constitution" (as expanded by law is unspoken)
The ONLY RECOURSE is for the House to Impeach and the Senate Convict. Or, use funding as coercion.
Short of that any POTUS can act with impunity in any matter. It's ALWAYS BEEN THAT WAY AND THERE IS NOTHING NEW HERE.
R U nutz ??? Thats absurd ...
IT NEVER ENDS! IT’S ALWAYS SOMETHING! EVERY FREAKIN’ DAY THERE’S ANOTHER ASSAULT ON THE TRADITIONAL VALUES OF AMERICA! STINKING LIB FASCIST! YOU WANT GAY MARRAIGE, OBAMA ? DUMP THAT COW MOOCHELLE AND MARRY DAVID BROCK! YOU TWO WERE MEANT FOR EACH OTHER!
*Whew!* I thought I was going to have a stroke.
I better stop now before I start typing things that will get me banned from FR.....
Au contraire - mon Frere ...
Article VI, Clauses II and III:
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.
The phrase, "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; ..." states that the Constitution AND the laws enacted pursuant are TOGETHER the supreme law of the land ...
And, the third Clause of Article VI REQUIRES that ALL Senators, Representatives, Executive Officers, and Judicial Officers [BOTH Federal AND State] shall be BOUND to support the Constitution ...
This means BOTH the Constitution AND the laws enacted pursuant thereof ...
Yes, No, and there is no difference.
Hussein has unilaterally determined a valid law is unconstitutional...
If we wanna talk history, then history has traditionally shown SCOTUS to be the arbiter of such questions.
Hussein also signed into law DADT REPEAL, which explicitly exempted DOMA from its influence...and that was barely 2 months ago.
Hussein can indeed choose to “enforce” a law, but Hussein, if called into suit by another party, has an obligation to enforce and defend a Constitutional law—it is in his oath. Since we’re so in love with tradition, and tradition holds SCOTUS as the arbiter of Constitutionality, then until DOMA is deemed to be anathema, the Kenyan Communist is abrogating his duty if he turns his back on this valid law once he has been summoned to a court.
“”I agree the president has the right to declare a federal act unconstitutional.”
R U nutz ??? Thats absurd ...”
No I am not. The 3 branches of the Federal Government are each responsible for obstruction unauthorized acts of the others.
In pretty much every area to remove a law is to grant greater not less freedom. This DOMA is no exception.
The States cannot be made to reconize the abominations created in other States. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Full_Faith_and_Credit_Clause#Application_to_family_law
At most the Feds will be forced to heed the State’s definition of marriage.
The trade off the federal governments own internal definition of marriage could be made meaningless by a subsequent strict textual constitutionality president. Who would uses the same power to basically shut down 80% of the Federal government, on the grounds that it is also not authorized in the Constitution.
Due to the size of the lawless Federal bureaucracy it would be practicably nearly imposable for subsequent presidents to fully reconstitute it before the next one. But even if they did they would open to re-consistering the extent of the same particular as the people realize just how little they actually need the Federal Governments teneticals.
Simply put if I became president I would uses my power to shut down most all of the Federal government by declaring such sectors to be unconstitutional and using that declaration to fire all their employees.
I would probably also deconstruct the Federal Military cause if I was elected a lot of States would have a like-minded sentiment and thus be eager to get out of this repressive union while they can.
Seems to me that since it is the Executive branch’s duty to enforce the laws passed by congress and signed by the President, his declared refusal to allow enforcement of this law is an open refusal to perform these duties.
He is not overruling the courts, he is overruling the Constitution.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.