Law Firm Fighting For DOMA Faces Backlash From Legal Groups, Colleges

[Kulindahr]

Confusion to the new firm!

 

[braex27]

Firestorm After Law Firm Drops Out of DOMA Fight


http://video.foxnews.com/v/4663477/firestorm-after-law-firm-drops-out-of-doma-fight/

I must say, watching this interview, I don't think Marge Baker made a compelling case at all. Sad as it seems, I tended to agree with the attorney who was in opposition. King & Spalding should not have accepted the case in the first place, but once they did whether in error or otherwise, they should have run it with due diligence regardless of how utterly unpopular the position and the client may be.

There would be no legal system if lawyers only ever represented angels in court rooms.

And as the host points out, whether a law currently on the books is unconstitutional is not a matter of public opinion, it is a point of law to be determined by the Court.

Just my thoughts.

 

[metta]

Ken Cuccinelli Drops Law Firm King & Spalding For Its 'Obsequious Act Of Weakness' On DOMA

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/29/ken-cuccinelli-king-spalding-doma_n_855406.html

 

[metta]

DOMA's New Lawyers: "Some Good Americans"

clause in the agreement is one that in which the Bancroft firm pledges that it "will not discriminate in its performance of this agreement because of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, disability or any other prohibited basis, and shall comply with all applicable employment laws."

Of course, the basic purpose of the representation is to undertake advocacy that affirmatively discriminates on the basis of sexual orientation -- so isn't it quaint that the General Counsel's office of the House of Representatives insists that the firm not discriminate on any other grounds while doing so?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/katherine-franke/some-good-americans-domas_b_857785.html

 

[metta]

Fresh Details on King & Spalding’s DOMA Withdrawal

"the DOMA matter was not fully submitted to King & Spalding”s business review committee, a firm requirement, before Clement signed a contract obligating the firm. They said the committee immediately began reviewing the case the day after the firm learned of the contract—and rejected it the next day"


http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2011/05/12/fresh-details-on-king-spaldings-doma-withdrawal/?mod=WSJBlog

 

[metta]

DOMA Defense: Lawmakers Puzzled Where House GOP Is Getting The Money To Pay Paul Clement

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/13/doma-defense-gop-paul-clement_n_861548.html

 

[Kulindahr]

Fresh Details on King & Spalding’s DOMA Withdrawal

"the DOMA matter was not fully submitted to King & Spalding”s business review committee, a firm requirement, before Clement signed a contract obligating the firm. They said the committee immediately began reviewing the case the day after the firm learned of the contract—and rejected it the next day"


http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2011/05/12/fresh-details-on-king-spaldings-doma-withdrawal/?mod=WSJBlog

So if Clement hadn't resigned, he could have been fired for violating company procedures.

DOMA Defense: Lawmakers Puzzled Where House GOP Is Getting The Money To Pay Paul Clement

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/13/doma-defense-gop-paul-clement_n_861548.html

Oho! Boehner may have broken the law? or at least the Republicans on the House counsel committee?

Whoa.