A major law firm has caved to pressure from militant homosexual activists, and one
of America’s top Supreme Court lawyers resigned from that firm rather than abandon
principle. That lawyer is former U.S. Solicitor General Paul Clement, and this is a story
that everyone who values the rule of law needs to understand.
In 1996, a bipartisan majority of the Republican-controlled Congress passed the Defense
of Marriage Act (DOMA), signed into law by Democratic President Bill Clinton. The
law specifies that for purposes of federal law, marriage is the union of one man and
one woman. The law also provides that if any state breaks with 2,000 years of Western
civilization by redefining marriage to include homosexual couples, no other state need
recognize those unions.
Then some people started redefining marriage. In 2003, Massachusetts became the first
state to do the same through an egregious instance of judicial activism. Today, a total of
five states out of fifty have same-sex marriage.
Predictably, some activists challenged DOMA in federal court.
The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has a duty to defend every federal law in court.
The only exceptions are for laws that undermine the president’s power (and even then,
DOJ sometimes defends it) or for laws where no reasonable argument can be made
defending that law.
Earlier this year, Attorney General Eric Holder announced that DOJ would no longer
defend DOMA because he and President Barack Obama believe that there is no rational
basis for the law. This is shocking, because President Obama is speaking out of both
sides of his mouth, saying that he still believes marriage is the union of one man and one
woman.
Let’s make sure we have this right: Marriage is between a man and a woman, but any law
saying that is so irrational that it cannot be defended in court. It seems President Obama
is either schizophrenic or disingenuous.
Thankfully, the U.S. House of Representatives took up the defense of DOMA. To do
so, they retained former U.S. Solicitor General Paul Clement—now a partner at King &
Spalding—to defend the law in court.
In response, a militant homosexual-agenda group, the Human Rights Campaign, took the
disgraceful action of organizing a nationwide boycott of King & Spalding and tried to
discourage graduating law students from working there.