Breaking: Give in on same-sex benefits, judge orders feds

[Neecy]

Grrrrrrrrrr......and people still wonder why we're not happy with this administration.

The chief federal appeals court judge in San Francisco bluntly ordered the Obama administration Thursday to stop resisting his finding that the wife of a lesbian court employee was entitled to government insurance coverage.

The federal agency that oversees benefits for government employees "shall cease at once its interference with the jurisdiction of this tribunal," Judge Alex Kozinski said in response to the Office of Personnel Management's rejection of his earlier ruling in the case.

He told the agency to let Karen Golinski, a staff attorney at the court's headquarters in San Francisco, enroll her wife, Amy Cunninghis, in the family health plan that already covers their 6-year-old son. He also ordered court officials to reimburse Golinski for the costs of buying insurance for Cunninghis since she applied for coverage in September 2008. That coverage now costs $429 a month, Golinski's lawyer said.

It was the second order from a Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals judge in two days rebuking the Office of Personnel Management for denying insurance coverage to the same-sex spouses of court-supervised employees. The agency, whose director was appointed by President Obama, intervened in both cases in February and invoked the Defense of Marriage Act, a 1996 law that bars federal marriage benefits to same-sex couples.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/11/19/BADV1ANFSR.DTL&tsp=1

[barbtries]

1. the up side:

maybe not all the courts belonging to the bushies these days?

the president should un-appoint the homophobic director of the office of personnel management.

[Beregond2]

2. You can't blame someone for doing his job,

which is to uphold the law. Blame DOMA, not the poor schmucks who have to defend it.

[barbtries]

3. oh please

there are people in government who won't even defend the constitution. agreed the law should be thrown out.

[donco6]

4. It was the second order from a judge.

Why would you ignore the first one, unless you just really don't want to give benefits to a particular married couple?

[Bluenorthwest]

5. Fierce Advocate strikes again

[ShadowLiberal]

6. How can a judge order this without ruling DOMA null and void for whatever reason?

As great as this story is, how can the judge legally order the federal government to do this, when DOMA specifically bans giving health care benefits to same sex spouses of federal employees?

I can see the first judge's order being legal despite DOMA, to pay the cost of health care insurance for the guy's same sex spouse, clever way to get around DOMA, reminds me of how separate but equal had holes slowly punched through it before it was finally struck down completely.

[imdjh]

7. Wild guess would be because Congress can't tell Justice what to do, not because DOMA is null...

DOMA is unconstitutional but the court would have to find that in a case which challenges the constitutionality of DOMA. On the other hand, Congress doesn't have the authority to tell the court what to do, other than overall funding. By the same token, the White House doesn't get to tell the court what to do either.