[Mariner]

"Hussein now has given himself five votes in the Judiciary of the United States. He determines what is constitutional and what is not constitutional. Got tyranny? "

You know every President has had this power to selectively enforce law, and most have exercised it...right?

Are you also aware the Federal Executive determines which cases it will fight in the federal courts...and has always had, and jealously guarded that power?

What's different here?

[newzjunkey]

Obama isn't saying he won't enforce it only that he won't defend it in the courts. It's BULL.

The law was passed by a president of his own party, Bill Clinton a former constitutional law profession. It was passed with huge bipartisan majorities in *both* houses of the congress. It should be vigorously defended until judicial review is exhausted.

[Recovering_Democrat]

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.