All in the course of a short morning, a number of developments have happened concerning the John Boehner’s desire to spend a half million of US taxpayer dollars to defend a law that has been determined to be unconstitutional by the courts. And the news about this may be far from over, yet still the main story line is now clearer than ever. Who will defend discrimination today? The Republicans will. This quote is from an early morning report on Politico.com:
In a real victory for supporters of same-sex marriage — and marking what seems like real marginalization for its foes — a major law firm has reversed course and will refuse to represent the House of Representatives in defending the Defense of Marriage Act.
Then, a more detailed story on the Huffington Post elaborates on a few different aspects of this story:
For some gay rights advocates, the most troubling part of this situation was a clause in the contract signed between King & Spalding and the House that barred the firm’s employees from engaging in any advocacy to “alter or amend” DOMA.
So, here we have two “themes” that have emerged:
- Law Firm first takes DOMA case and then reverses decision to defend DOMA
- Law contract to defend DOMA requires straight jacket on law firm.
For me, the second theme is the most important, and unfortunately not getting the press it deserves. So, it is one thing that the House Republicans want to spend tax dollars to support a law that the courts (and the White House) have called unconstitutional, but the really tricky part of it was that the contract that was signed between the law firm and Boehner, required that anyone and everyone at the law firm could not say or do anything at all that impacted DOMA in any way. And this is no small law firm; they have offices all over the place with many, many lawyers working for them. This contract would essentially be a gag order against anyone else at the firm, including many gay or lesbian persons who may not agree with the actions of Clement, the single lawyer who took the case, but who would npt be able to say or do anything because of the contract.
Why such an extensive gag order/contract? That is a question more people should be asking and investigating!
When it was announced that Clement had taken the case, there was much surprise because the law firm, King and Spalding was considered close to the LGBT community, and had done many pro-LGBT cases pro bono. They actively seek out young, bright LGBT lawyers. so, I wasn’t surprised when the head of the firm announced that the firm was backing out of the case, and claimed that there was a problem with their vetting process for accepting cases.
So there is another theme here:
3. GOP Republicans demand far-reaching gag order which puts the entire law firm’s position in jeopardy.
In my opinion, this more than anything else caused the firm to act as they did. Of course, in any law firm, there may be lawyers who hold different viewpoints and positions and some might take a client than others there would never take, but for a contract to have such far reaching ramifications for the entire firm, is unacceptable. but there is a fourth theme that the Huffington Post story centers upon:
Most importantly in all of this, Speaker Boehner has an army of in-house legal talent at the House of Representatives who could ably represent his position in court. If he is serious about cutting the deficit he needs to look to his in-house council to represent him in these proceedings.
4. GOP Republicans waste tax dollars rather than use their own lawyers.
This is the “Democrat” slant on the whole thing, but from a practical perspective is a position worth some press. How can this conservative movement claim to be all about the budget and cutting spending and yet, agree to pay an outside lawyer $520 per hour? It accentuates what many of us have been saying all along, that the Tea Party is a small (but loud) group of folks who are being used by the Republican Party which really only cares about Social conservatism and issues that harm the poor, women, and other marginalized people like the LGBT community. The call for fiscal responsibility is a real battle cry of some, but being used as a ploy by those in power who don’t really care about spending or the budget. So, I guess it isn’t the Democrat slant, but rather the light of Truth on the who thing.
But then, late morning, the situation got even messier and another theme surfaced, which had really been there all along, but was now utterly visible. Paul Clement, who has quit the law firm, King and Spalding so that he can represent the Boehner and the House of Representatives in their fight to defend DOMA. Here is the story from Joe.My.God about his decision.
I resign out of the firmly held belief that a representation should not be abandoned because the client’s legal position is extremely unpopular in certain quarters. Defending unpopular clients is what lawyers do,”
You could take this at face value except for that pesky gag order contract, remember? I’d totally agree that everyone deserves to get a lawyer, and that many lawyers defend unpopular causes or positions. But that wasn’t the real issue here, nor is it the real reason he is no longer with that law firm. And now, Paul Clement’s position is very clear. He wants to support discrimination so much so, that he left his firm so that he could do so.
What is scary here is that he must either be so blinded by his own anti-gay concerns or he must truly believe he can make a winning case for such a dramatic action on his part. Or, perhaps King and Spalding will come out and say that he was fired, and didn’t resign? I hope it isn’t that he feels he has such a strong case that he can win. If any lawyer does win a defense of DOMA section three, it will be a major blow to the progress made by the LGBT community towards equality, and a huge blow to the White House. Obama is both a veery smart man and a constitutional lawyer, so I doubt that he made the decision to not defend DOMA lightly. Time will tell how this continues to play out. Until then, looks like your tax dollars are supporting the continuation of discrimination.
via Clement firm drops DOMA case – Ben Smith – POLITICO.com.
Here is the Huffington Post story: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/25/law-firm-doma-house-republicans-vetting-inadequate_n_853226.html
Here is the Joe.My.God story: http://joemygod.blogspot.com/2011/04/paul-clement-quits-king-spalding-to.html