quantumfireball2099
New Member
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/crit...ecision-newt-gingrich-calls/story?id=12992207
While I agree with Obama on the basis that I feel it is unconstitutional, the last sentance is what gets me thinking. I'm wondering if there are limits to what the President can decide to not enforce.
Thoughts?
ABC News- "In a letter to members of Congress Wednesday, Attorney General Eric Holder explained that Obama determined that DOMA, which defines marriage for federal purposes as only between one man and one woman, "violates the equal protection component of the Fifth Amendment" and therefore is not obligated to defend it.
The Obama administration has moved the goalposts of the usual role of the Executive Branch in defending statutes," he wrote.
Kerr says the president's action could undermine the role of the impartial court system if the Justice Department can conduct its own constitutional reviews of challenged laws, and then exercise discretion in whether to defend them.
The executive branch's "duty to defend" a law, even if the administration finds it politically unpopular, has been tradition for decades. If Obama can choose not to defend DOMA on constitutional grounds, some critics say, a future Republican president may be able to do the same to Democrats' controversial health care reform law.
While I agree with Obama on the basis that I feel it is unconstitutional, the last sentance is what gets me thinking. I'm wondering if there are limits to what the President can decide to not enforce.
Thoughts?