Federal worker sues (in federal court) for same-sex spouse benefits.

[GodlessBiker]

Federal worker sues for same-sex spouse benefits

The Associated Press
Wednesday, January 20, 2010; 5:43 PM

SAN FRANCISCO -- A federal employee in California is suing the Obama administration to force it to provide health benefits to her same-sex spouse.

The U.S. Office of Personnel Management told Karen Golinski that it was refusing to extend benefits to her wife because federal law prohibits the government from recognizing gay marriage.

The office made its decision over the objections of 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Chief Judge Alex Kozinski, who called the move illegal discrimination.

Golinski is a lawyer for the 9th Circuit in San Francisco.

The Office of Personnel Management says the Justice Department told it to ignore the judge's ruling because it went against the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act.

The lawsuit filed Wednesday in San Francisco federal court asks for an order to provide Golinski's spouse with health benefits afforded to spouses of federal employees.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/20/AR2010012004028.html

--------------------

And yet, the administration has reserved to it the right to declare certain laws unconstitutional, particularly within "signing statements" regarding legislation that has provisions the President decides are unconstitutional.

[TheWraith]

1. There's no signing statement on DOMA.

Technically the OPM is acting according to the law, until and unless the law gets voided on equal protection grounds.

[ruggerson]

2. Absolutely untrue

This was an order from a Federal Judge in an administrative proceeding, an order decided on SEPARATION OF POWERS. A similar case in the same Circuit resulted in another order, declaring the applicable section of DOMA unconstitutional. The administration could very easily have LEGALLY complied with both these orders, thus helping to weaken DOMA as challenges to it wend their way up the judiciary.

Instead, the administration DEFIED both orders, using DOMA as a defense.

It is utterly unconscionable to defend them on this.

[GodlessBiker]

4. +1

[Toasterlad]

5. "It is utterly unconscionable to defend them on this."

That's our Wraith.

[TheWraith]

6. An administrative proceeding carries less weight than litigation.

In any event, this is a very good thing because it takes the case into federal court and provides a platform for a broader decision. If the feds complied with the order, there would be no ability to take the case up the judicial food chain. Changing the law is better than ignoring the law.

[GodlessBiker]

3. The administration has said it is free to disregard laws it believes are unconstitutional...

without having to issue signing statements.

The signing statement is irrelevant. The point is that the President has reserved the power to disregard laws he believes to be unconstitutional. He has chosen not to find DOMA unconstitutional. It is his right to do that, of course; I am just taking notice.