House LGBT supporters pressure Boehner on DOMA defense

April 5, 2011 at 11:00 am 66 comments

By Adam Bink

Via Chris over at Metro Weekly, members of the House leadership and strong supporters of LGBT rights within the House Democratic Caucus sent a letter to Speaker Boehner, asking that he detail answers on the planned intervened defense of DOMA in advance of an April 18th deadline in the Windsor case. The key demands about which they write:

Among other things, we are interested in a status report on who will be representing the House, estimates regarding the cost and length of proposed litigation efforts, the anticipated role of the House in litigation (i.e., intervenor or amicus curiae), and your assessment regarding the likelihood of success on the merits.  If you or House General Counsel already have arranged for representation by outside counsel, we would welcome and appreciate their participation in this briefing.

As I wrote about a month ago, if we’re cutting funding for tsunami warning centers (and, I’m willing to bet, nuclear safety), we as taxpayers deserve to know how much this is going to cost. It’s not a partisan issue.

The full letter can be found here.

Entry filed under: DOMA trials.

By ‘The Hispanic Church,’ NOM really means The Hispanic Ministerial Association of Rhode Island Launching a 50-state network to repeal DOMA

66 Comments Add your own

  • 1. Ed Cortes  |  April 5, 2011 at 11:05 am

    Maybe he’s just creating jobs for lawyers?

  • 2. Richard A. Jernigan  |  April 5, 2011 at 11:05 am

    I am so glad to see that we are not stopping our efforts to end DOMA.

    • 3. adambink  |  April 5, 2011 at 8:00 pm

      On the contrary, we’re launching the next phase tomorrow!

      • 4. Mackenzie  |  April 6, 2011 at 5:18 am

        deets please!

  • 5. LCH  |  April 5, 2011 at 11:24 am


  • 6. MichGuy  |  April 5, 2011 at 11:30 am

    I just got an email from the Cali Court about something with the pending case.

    It said this;
    The following transaction has occurred in:
    Case: S189476, Supreme Court of California

    • 7. Mark  |  April 5, 2011 at 3:54 pm

      There was no link

    • 8. Kathleen  |  April 5, 2011 at 5:30 pm

      There won’t be links on the Cali Court docket. There is no reliable way to receive many of the filings online, but I’m doing my best to locate and post them anyway. The filing by plaintiffs referenced in that email is available here:

      • 9. Kathleen  |  April 5, 2011 at 5:40 pm

        You can always look at my Scribd account to see if I uploaded anything… and also at the Prop8TT facebook group wall (linked with my name)

  • 10. Ann S.  |  April 5, 2011 at 11:30 am


    • 11. JonT  |  April 5, 2011 at 2:03 pm

  • 12. Sagesse  |  April 5, 2011 at 11:35 am

    Really interested in knowing which private firm(s) they will hire to represent them. And will they be respected members of the Supreme Court bar, or religious hired guns. It would also be interesting to see who turns them down, but that information will probably never see the light of day.

    • 13. Felyx  |  April 5, 2011 at 12:16 pm

      Freedom of Information Act, Sagesse… if someone wants to expose it, it will get exposed!

  • 14. Ronnie  |  April 5, 2011 at 12:00 pm

    D…O…M…A…discrimination GO AWAY!!!!…..subscribing…<3..Ronnie

  • 15. Rhie  |  April 5, 2011 at 12:13 pm


  • 16. Ronnie  |  April 5, 2011 at 12:30 pm

    Lucy Liu is a New Yorker who supports Marriage Equality….<3…Ronnie:

    • 17. Joel  |  April 5, 2011 at 1:22 pm

      I’ve always been fond of Ms. Liu. This racks that fondness up a notch! Let’s get more celebs out there making a joyous noise!

  • 18. AB  |  April 5, 2011 at 1:01 pm

    Does anyone know what the City and County of San Francisco had to say on the standing issue?

    • 19. amy c  |  April 5, 2011 at 3:10 pm

      standing of protect marriage or the dufus in so-cal?

      • 20. AB  |  April 5, 2011 at 4:10 pm

        Protect marriage. Today they, apparently, filed their brief in the CA SC, and I would kinda like to see if it had anything new and exciting in it.

    • 21. Zak  |  April 5, 2011 at 6:02 pm

      I fell alseep reading the brief…

    • 22. Kathleen  |  April 5, 2011 at 6:36 pm

      AB, here’s the brief. There are several attachments, which appear to be items SF wants entered into the record. I think the brief is just the first 65 pages (I haven’t looked closely enough to be sure)

  • 23. JonT  |  April 5, 2011 at 2:40 pm

    Colorado: B.J. Nikkel: Facebook page claims blood will be on her hands for helping kill Civil Union Act

  • 24. Ed  |  April 5, 2011 at 3:00 pm

    Oh yes….NOM is freaking out……This *could* be the end…..they know they have lost…’s only a matter of time….

    « Previous Entry
    Act Now to Protect the Only Federal Law that Preserves Marriage
    April 5, 2011 at 4:28 pm
    0 0

    Defeated in state after state, gay marriage activists have taken their radical agenda to Washington, D.C., seeking to force same-sex marriage on the entire nation in one fell swoop.

    Only one federal law stands in their way. The Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).

    Join NOM’s Defend DOMA campaign today!

    DOMA defines marriage as the union of a husband and wife—throughout federal statutes and regulations, forming a first line of defense against claims that our state marriage laws are unconstitutional.

    Barack Obama ponders SSM

    Last July, a Boston federal judge ruled DOMA unconstitutional. Then, in an extra-constitutional power grab, President Obama instructed the Department of Justice to abandon its appeal, setting himself up as head of not just the Executive Branch, but the Judicial and Legislative as well, falsely claiming DOMA unconstitutional. And now some in Congress have introduced a bill to repeal DOMA outright.

    The stakes couldn’t be higher. If DOMA falls, every gain from the past 15 years—every state marriage statute, every constitutional amendment, and the votes of more than 30 million Americans—could be for nothing.

    That’s why NOM launched what may well be our most important initiative yet: Defend DOMA. Thanks to a $1 million matching grant, every dollar donated between now and midnight April 15th will be matched, doubling its impact.

    Already, we’ve sent more than 70,000 petitions to Congress over the past 5 weeks, and raised thousands of dollars to make sure DOMA is protected in Congress and in the courts. But we need your help today. Time is short, and your support today will help protect marriage in America against its biggest threat yet.

    Take the DOMA challenge today with your gift of $30, $300, or even $3000 or more if you have the means. Then help spread the word to your family, friends, and co-workers.

    • 25. Ed  |  April 5, 2011 at 3:02 pm

      And here’s a big middle finger to Maggie, etc…..

    • 26. Straight Ally #3008  |  April 5, 2011 at 3:12 pm

      And the rhetoric will continue to ramp up – although, mark my words, they’ll be quiet once DOMA falls. Look at DADT repeal, that was supposed to be the end of the world, and now just a few manic TV preachers bother to mention it – oh, and some far-right presidential candidates….

    • 27. JonT  |  April 5, 2011 at 3:25 pm

      Boy they sure love their hyperbole, don’t they?

      “Run for the hills! The homos are coming! They’re going to FORCE their MASSIVE AGENDAS DOWN OUR THROATS!!! HELP US KEEP OUR JOBS!!!”

      Would love to know who’s providing the $1M seed money. It’s too bad they can’t spend that money on things that actually *help* people, but oh well…

      Hate has a price, and it’s only $30, $300, or even $3000 or more! :)

      • 28. Straight Ally #3008  |  April 5, 2011 at 4:45 pm

        What’s with all the “ramming it down our throats” imagery? Seriously! It’s like The Daily Show writes half of their material.

        • 29. JonT  |  April 5, 2011 at 6:01 pm

          SA3008: I have no idea…

          I just hear it so often from “them”, I’m starting to use it now too! :)

      • 30. DaveP  |  April 6, 2011 at 8:28 am

        Hee hee. NOM is afraid of my big thobbing gay agenda. Hee hee.

    • 31. AnonyGrl  |  April 6, 2011 at 8:59 am

      One million dollar matching grant from WHOM?

      That is the question I would like answered. The people who throw in $30, $300 or even $3000 are not really the big concern here. I want to know who is pushing the buttons.

      Is this the Catholic Church? Chick-Fil-A? Target? A private donor? Or perhaps a bag of hot air that NOM made up wholesale in the hopes that people will donate more that way?

  • 32. Matthew  |  April 5, 2011 at 4:17 pm

    The NOMblog is funny today.

    Yet another desperate call for donations from scared people. And Maggie has a thread about Dan savage. She’s shocked and appaled that he advocates honesty with your loved ones, lol.

    • 33. Sagesse  |  April 5, 2011 at 5:36 pm

      To quote Maggie G

      “He brings, in other words, the best of gay sexual ethics and experience to a straight audience, with potentially disastrous results.”

      And this has what to do with marriage? There are gay sexual ethics now, as opposed to…. the straight sexual ethics of the man who left her pregnant and went on to finish medical school and make a life with someone else?

      Just sounds… well…. anti-gay…

      • 34. JonT  |  April 5, 2011 at 5:51 pm

        “He brings, in other words, the best of gay sexual ethics and experience to a straight audience, with potentially disastrous results.”

        Yeah – I had to chuckle at that sentence. She obviously doesn’t know anything about Dan Savage – other than he is gay, married, and has an adopted son. (commence ‘pearl-clutching’).

        I’ve been reading his “Savage Love” column since it was first published, and even before that, when his column used to be called “Hey Faggot!” :)

        His audience is not just composed of us immoral homos. Maggie should do some more homework.

        I’d also love to see what “potentially disastrous results” will “result” when he talks to a ‘straight audience’.

        To Maggie G:

        A significant portion of his audience is already straight, Maggie. Personally, I see absolutely nothing wrong with actual honesty, communication, and compromise in a relationship.

        Maybe it doesn’t work that way for you Maggie, but then, that’s your problem, isn’t it? :)

      • 35. DaveP  |  April 6, 2011 at 8:34 am

        Well, since ‘the best of gay sexual ethics’ are the same as any other kind of sexual ethics (you know, be kind and considerate with your partner, be honest with your partner, don’t cheat if you are in a monogamous relationship, if you love someone let them know it, etc.) I can’t imagine how it could be ‘disasterous’ for a straight audience to be exposed to this.

        OK, it tends to be disasterous – for NOM – when people realize gays have the same values and ethics as everybody else. Maybe that’s what she is worried about.

        • 36. Sagesse  |  April 6, 2011 at 9:04 am

          My point, indeed. Ethics are not like a NOM T-shirt… everyone is issued one and they’re all exactly the same. Different people subscribe to different ethical, moral or religious standards. There are LGBT people with no ethics, and there are straight people with no ethics. Such a silly label. Traditional marriage between a man and a woman is about responsible procreation… oh, and gay sexual ethics will contaminate marriage?

        • 37. AnonyGrl  |  April 6, 2011 at 9:05 am

          Yes… the disasterous results are that the straight audience gains understanding of the issues, realizes that discrimination is completely wrong, and works hard to be better in the future, including not supporting anti-gay organizations.

          Disasterous indeed for NOM!!

  • 38. Kathleen  |  April 5, 2011 at 5:50 pm

    UPDATE: Perry

    City and County of San Francisco (Plaintiff-Intervenor) Brief on the questions certified to the California Supreme Court. (w/ 5 Attachments). Filed 4/04/2011 (entered on CA SC docket 4/5/2011)

    This wasn’t placed on the California Supreme Court docket until today, with a note that it was “untimely.” The copy above came through on the federal e-filing system yesterday. I’m trying to find out what the problem is with the California filing. If I learn anything, I’ll let you know.

  • 39. Sagesse  |  April 5, 2011 at 6:16 pm

    This is going to be a tough call. A two front war is expensive, and needs foot soldiers.

    Will Equality California Push For Pro-Gay Marriage Ballot Measure in 2012?

  • 40. Sagesse  |  April 5, 2011 at 6:32 pm

    Another way to make a statement. Not advocating, just reporting.

    Challenging DOMA Through Income-Tax Forms

    • 41. Ronnie  |  April 6, 2011 at 12:03 pm

      More on the “Refuse to Lie” protest….

      MSNBC’s Thomas Roberts’ interview with Tara Siegel Bernard from The New York Times…..<3…Ronnie:

  • 42. Sagesse  |  April 5, 2011 at 6:51 pm

    And a formidable group of self satisfied fogeys they are. Rich fogeys, unfortunately.

    Christian Right Leaders Return to War Room over DOMA

  • 43. Sagesse  |  April 5, 2011 at 7:00 pm

    The Republicans can’t seem to resist.

    RNC Slams Obama on DADT Repeal, Stopped DOMA Defense, Prop 8 Opposition

    • 44. JonT  |  April 5, 2011 at 7:28 pm

      Indeed they can’t.

      America got suckered in the last elections. The republicans/teabaggers were all about “Jobs!”, “Economy!”.

      Then they get elected and what do they do? Go back to the same old social and ideological crap.

      Gay Marriage? Evil.
      Planned Parenthood? Evil.
      Public Education? Evil.
      Environmental Protection Agency? Evil.
      PBS? NPR? Evil. EVIL!

      Jobs? Economy? … (crickets chirping).

      Same old shit as usual.

  • 45. Sagesse  |  April 5, 2011 at 7:53 pm

    Senate panel to vote Thursday on gay judicial nominee

  • 46. Michael  |  April 5, 2011 at 9:50 pm

    So, the radical conservatives are going to get rid of Medicare and Social Security, end all social programs, cease funding education, eliminate the EPA and end all regulations of corporate greed….to “save money”…yet they can waste millions on promoting the immoral anti-gay agenda? Me thinks it’s time for an Egyptian-style protest in this country, sooner rather than later, before there is nothing left to save.

  • 47. matthew  |  April 6, 2011 at 2:48 am

    Over on the NOMblog, in that DOMA thread.

    Check out this fun message, from one Kim M.

    “Gays have a more of a chance to contact stds, life spans are shortened, the “gay marriages” only last for roughly around 5 years. Syphillis is most common among gay men and in some cities it is an epidemic. Loss of control and hemorrhoids , and these diseases are common among homsexuality:
    Anal Cancer
    Chlamydia trachomatis
    Giardia lamblia
    Herpes simplex virus
    Human immunodeficiency virus
    Human papilloma virus
    Isospora belli
    Viral hepatitis types B & C

    I never heard of half that stuff so I did some research. Half that list is parasitic infections acquired from drinking contaminated food/water, lol. Most of the rest of the list is cured by antibiotics or penicillin, and not a single thing on the list is exclusive to GLBTs. Epic fail

    Further down she lists a website that ‘educates’ you about gays. It says stuff like gays live 20 years less than straights, that 28% of gay men have had sex with over 1000 different partners, and that 30% of gays are into fisting. It’s just…lol been a while since I read such a vile, purely fictitious, stereotyped coma-enducing piece of garbage.

    I tried to post a reply to that nonsense, but it seems they banned yet another 2 e-mail addresses. Someone help me out here :)

    • 48. Mackenzie  |  April 6, 2011 at 5:25 am

      oh my gosh! That part about that gay stats (28% have had sex with over 1000) made me fall out of my chair laughing.

      • 49. Felyx  |  April 6, 2011 at 6:01 am

        Over 1000 partners? Who has the time for that! Almost makes you want to be gay. (I can hear their jealousy seeping through!!!)

        But fisting and anal cancer? Are there really that many Lesbians into that sort of thing? /sarcasm

        This is just more repetition of the resmearch done by FRC and their affiliates. Most pseudo-scientists dispute these claims and no reputable scientific establishment will go anywhere near them.

        Keep educating… crap like this withers under the light of day.

  • 50. Sagesse  |  April 6, 2011 at 4:44 am

    Hearing on Thursday

    Service chiefs to testify on ‘Don’t Ask’ repeal

  • 51. Sagesse  |  April 6, 2011 at 4:53 am

    Carney mum on executive orders against LGBT bias

    • 53. Sagesse  |  April 6, 2011 at 6:03 am

      These are the NOM disclosure cases in Maine and RI.

      • 54. Ed  |  April 6, 2011 at 6:20 am

        Sagesse….for being a foreigner, you sure stay on top of it all :) I LOVE it!

        • 55. Sagesse  |  April 6, 2011 at 7:25 am

          Not a complete foreigner :). My mother is American. And I may have been a librarian in another life.

  • 56. Sagesse  |  April 6, 2011 at 7:58 am

    This is really an article about the challenge of including ‘trans’ protections in the LGB and sometimes T legislation being discussed around the country.

    QNotes: Marriage Equality or Bust?

  • 57. Chuck in Antioch  |  April 6, 2011 at 8:06 am

    Here’s something I just posted on the NOMbolg in response to a stupid remark made by one of NOM’s supporters which will, mostlikely, never see the light of day (it’s still under review):

    Hey Marty…isn’t that what you’re trying to do to the supporters of same-sex marriage….shove your views down our throats????? You people against same-sex marriage need to open your eyes and realize that same-sex marriage WILL happen for the entire country. Maybe not soon, but it will happen because it is the right thing to do. Why, on earth, would a Gay man or woman want to marry someone they don’t love to satisfy your fanatic religious views? You are the immoral ones. And also, why is it that all the people against same-sex marriage equate marriage with sex? Sex has NOTHING to do with marriage. Hetersexual married couples are married without having sex, why do you think that can’t happen with same-sex couples. You are not against marriage, you are against Homosexual sex….which, by the way, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled NOT to be illegal in the ENTIRE country….so why do you all think it’s something to use against same-sex marriage? Yes, 31 states have voted against same-sex marriage just like several states back in the 40’s and 50’s outlawed interracial marriage…look what happened to those laws….ALL overturned. It’s inevitable…same-sex marriage will happen and there won’t be a thing you bigots can do about it. Brian Brown and Maggie Gallagher will just have to find another job (I hear McDonald’s is hiring) because this gravy train will be coming to a screeching halt very soon!

    • 58. matthew  |  April 6, 2011 at 3:00 pm

      I try so very hard to keep all my posts on their site clean. I try to stick to the scientific and judicial facts. And I try to mix in as much snark as I can get away with without name-calling.

      It’s nearly impossible, in the face of all the vile, dishonest rhetoric they use about us. But I think it’s worth enduring to get our messages across to even a few of their side. I try to share part of my story with them too, just like I do with my anti-gay coworkers. If they are human beings with empathy, then it will move them whether they like it or not. If they are Maggie or Brian, or any of the professional hate-mongers then it wont work, because they make too much money to stop.

      They frequently say things like ‘If SSM becomes a reality!’ To which I always point out that SSM is a reality. There are tens of thousands of legally married gay families all across the united states. Those reminders almost always get moderated away, lol.

  • 60. Sagesse  |  April 6, 2011 at 8:48 am

    A Heritage Foundation piece on DADT repeal. Expresses attitudes that argue for an Executive Order prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. The author goes into obsessive detail about how it is imperative that chaplains and servicemembers be able to express their religious convictions about gay servicemembers and to gay servicemembers at every possible opportunity.

    A Clash of Integrities: Moral and Religious Liberty in the Armed Forces

    • 61. AnonyGrl  |  April 6, 2011 at 9:22 am

      But those same chaplains and servicemembers would be STRONGLY punished were they to express their religious convictions at every possible opportunity about atheists, about other religions, about other races, about women, about people with handicaps, about …

      Hm. Sorry… nice try there Heritage Foundation, but no.

      • 62. Straight for Equality  |  April 6, 2011 at 4:43 pm

        And what about the freedom of speech for LGBT service members? If they even mention their same-sex spouse or anything that reveals their orientation, out they go. That certainly has a negative effect on their military career. No tears for the chaplains from me!

  • 63. Ronnie  |  April 6, 2011 at 10:40 am

    New Heights Of Hypocrisy For NOM

    NOM’s gold standard: Boo at what we say, not at what we ourselves do

    So after NOM (National Organization for Mendacity) boasts about promising to spend $1 million to control the personal lives of LGBT tax paying citizens in Maryland according to their (NOM) selfish issues, they (NOM) then flaunt their mendacity by propagating what Tim Gill (actually his lawyer) really said, sending his (lawyers) announcement through the propaganda machine putting words in his mouth.

    There is no evidence of Tim Gill (or his lawyer) saying that. Not one word & yet NOM throws it around as if it was a quote. His lawyer said that he would be spending $2mill…..but NOTHING to affect of what NOM is saying he said…

    Anyway, what the hull?, NOM is allowed to spend money from some anonymous millionaire to stop Marriage Equality & control the personal lives of LGBT Americans but Tim Gill is not allowed to openly & honestly spend his money to fight for Equality?

    *cough”do as I say*cough*not as I do*cough*


  • 64. Straight for Equality  |  April 6, 2011 at 10:59 am

    I found this article interesting:

    • 65. Sagesse  |  April 6, 2011 at 12:01 pm

      Very disconcerting for the NOM ‘don’t confuse me with the facts’ school of marriage.

      • 66. JonT  |  April 6, 2011 at 3:43 pm


        A primary reason (the actual facts) that right-wing organizations like NOM spend so much time trying to rewrite history and de-emphasize non-religious education.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed

Support the Prop 8 Trial Tracker

Connect with us

Get to know your fellow Prop 8 Trial Trackers on Facebook.

Please send tips to

Follow us on Twitter @EqualityOnTrial

Sign-up for updates on the Prop 8 trial, including breaking-news alerts.


TWITTER: Follow us @EqualityOnTrial

Share this

Bookmark and Share

SITE STATS (by Wordpress)

  • 4,585,324 views of the Tracker and counting as of today...