Outside the courtroom, there’s been a lot going on regarding DOMA too. We’ll round it all up here.
First of all, Think Progress reports that Boehner’s gone quiet on the case:
As NPR’s Nina Totenberg reported: Those defending the law have been strangely unwilling to make their arguments outside court. Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) declined to be interviewed for this broadcast, as did Clement and leading House members who voted for the law.
Maybe they can read the writing on the wall? Andrew Sullivan at the Dish gives his theory:
The GOP is increasingly isolated, with Independents closer to the Dems on this, and the next generation overwhelmingly for it. Meanwhile the fundamentalist base cannot change their minds – since their minds are made up by the Bible, not current reality. And the court’s seeming reluctance to end this debate will only prolong the agony. I think of this wedge boomerang as Karl Rove’s parting gift to the Republican coalition he played such a central part in destroying.
Over at Gay Star News, they’re reporting on a petition to demand that Justice Scalia recuse himself from the cases because of his obvious, over the top anti gay bias:
A petition is calling for an anti-gay judge to remove himself from Supreme Court discussions on Proposition 8 and the Defense of Marriage Act. Justice Antonin Scalia, who has a record of anti-gay rhetoric, is the subject of a petition calling him to recuse himself from any gay rights deliberation by the Supreme Court. It reads: ‘Judicial bias has no place in the highest court in the land. Judge Antonin Scalia has expressed openly, time and again, his bias and contempt for GLBT issues. ‘For this reason, he should recuse himself from any deliberations by the Supreme Court of the United States on issues involving DOMA, California’s Prop 8, and any other gay rights issues.
Think Progress thinks that getting rid of DOMA would boost the US economy:
The Congressional Budget Office estimates that DOMA increases the deficit by roughly $1 billion a year, and while that amount is small, striking it down would save far more than ending subsidies to NPR or some of the other “deficit reduction” ideas Republicans have pursued in the past. Those savings would come from numerous sources. Tax revenues would rise by more than $400 million a year, and though costs on programs like Social Security and federal benefits would increase, costs for safety net programs like Medicare, Supplemental Security Income, Medicaid, and other programs would go down.
LGBT Weekly reports on a different kind of financial boost:
Should the Supreme Court overturn a federal law that defines marriage as solely between a man and a woman, some married same-sex couples will save $8,000 or more in income tax, a new analysis finds. This week, the court will hear a case challenging the Defense of Marriage Act, a 1996 law that prevents same-sex couples from receiving more than 1,000 federal benefits that opposite-sex married couples receive.
Our favorite gay statistician, Nate Silver, takes another look at marriage equality trends in the states at Joe.My.God:
For right now, it is probably best to treat the question of whether a majority of Americans support same-sex marriage as having an ambiguous answer. Polls are on the verge of saying that they do, but the ballot results are more equivocal. By 2016, however, voters in 32 states would be willing to vote in support of same-sex marriage, according to the model. And by 2020, voters in 44 states would do so, assuming that same-sex marriage continues to gain support at roughly its previous rate.
Towleroad.com reports that NOM’s Maggie Gallagher is freaking out:
“For the Supreme Court to brand this view as irrational bigotry akin to racial discrimination would not end the culture wars, it would entrench them, and it would take away something very precious, which is the right of seven million Californians to use the democratic process to make our case to the American people. And so, I certainly think trying that to persuade the American people that the Constitution drafted by our Founding Fathers in 1789 has always required gay marriage is a long stretch and I’m hopeful that the Supreme Court will uphold Prop 8.”
On the other side, out gay Bishop Gene Robinson thinks the Court will come down 6-3 against DOMA, On Top Magazine reports:
“I think the case against DOMA is extraordinary,” Robinson said. “And I cannot imagine the court not declaring it unconstitutional. In fact, I’m so hopeful I think we might even get a 6-3 vote out of this. Because in one sense you could make the conservative case that the federal government was messing in states’ business in terms of marriage. And even from a conservative viewpoint, you could possibly vote against it.”