Excellent news; about damn time.

Awesome!

In sorta somewhat related LGBT news:

Target has pledged something like a half million dollars for LGBT friendly groups. So anyone who was protesting them for their anti-gay practices may want to check in and see if they're on the level again.
I would post a link but I'm too lazy for The Google right now.

Pretty fucking awesome

Holy crap. I think there's some precedence for the DoJ not defending laws but this will cost political capital. Good for them.

Woot! I love that he specifically cites the two federal lawsuits filed in November by Windsor and Pedersen as what finally boxed them into giving up defending DOMA.

Kudos up the wazoo to the plaintiffs, the ACLU, GLAD and participating law firms who strategized the two cases so nicely - way to fucking use the judicial branch properly for the common good!

In particular, shudders and teary-eyed for the Windsor case - loyal Slog readers may remember earlier coverage at http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archive….

Beautiful, just beautiful.

http://www.aclu.org/lgbt-rights/windsor-…

http://www.glad.org/doma/faq-pedersen

Fantastic news! And congrats to all who kept the pressure on to get this thing done.

Yay! Such good news!

More proof that at least the Dems learn from their mistakes, unlike the Repugnants.

awesome, but surprised your blog post is devoid of any celebratory expression, are you a robot Eli?

Fuck yeah.

@9 Since when is "Right on" not a celebratory expression?

New this was coming eventually, but a ballsy move for before 2013. Obama crew must be pretty confident in their re-election chances.

Oh God. As with many of Eli's posts, this one's lacking in understanding of how the law works. Obama can't declare a law unconstitutional. Neither can Holder. That's reserved for the courts. And unttil it's been found unconstitutional by the Supremes, he can (and probably will be) sued to compel him to uphold the law.

Complicated shit. But it's a step in the right direction. It's only a step, though.

@11 "Right on" was an update.

YES!!!!

This doesn't really sound like a win, more like they've run out of two-faced, double-talking, specious legal bullshit for court:

We will, however, remain parties to the cases and continue to represent the interests of the United States throughout the litigation. I have informed Members of Congress of this decision, so Members who wish to defend the statute may pursue that option. The Department will also work closely with the courts to ensure that Congress has a full and fair opportunity to participate in pending litigation.

Section 3 of DOMA will continue to remain in effect unless Congress repeals it or there is a final judicial finding that strikes it down, and the President has informed me that the Executive Branch will continue to enforce the law.

I think the lack of celebration is that this isn't totally struck down JUST yet:

Quoting Pete Williams from NBC vis MSNBC, he says the following are the immediate practical effects:

"-The Defense of Marriage Act remains in effect unless a federal court strikes it down or Congress repeals it.

-The government will stop defending the law in two court cases, in New York and Connecticut, where the law has been challenged, and in any other cases challenging the law.

-If the law is to be defended, members of Congress would have to step up and join those lawsuits."

..given the current Congress, don't be surprised if there's a swift reaction here. I just hope the counter-reaction is stronger.

This basically shows how brilliant Obama is, though only in politics and not in principle. If the House GOP reacts, the "What about the jobs?" angle will be accented more than ever before in a spotlight of a longtime national issue. And I don't see this backfiring. I don't think Obama still cares about gay people as much as many wish, but if it benefits him politically, he'll do a masterful 1-2 punch.. and this is currently the "1" part we're seeing right now.

The stay issued in the ninth circuit is being challenged now.

@13, Yeah, California being sued to force them to enforce Prop 8 went real far, didn't it?

Oh, and I love this. I guess all ya'll Obamar apologists who've spent the last two years stating that the preznalent and his Injustice Department are legally required to defend this despicable law will be calling for Obamar and Holder's immediate impeachments.

At the same time, the Department in the past has declined to defend statutes despite the availability of professionally responsible arguments, in part because - as here - the Department does not consider every such argument to be a "reasonable" one. Moreover, the Department has declined to defend a statute in cases, like this one, where the President has concluded that the statute is unconstitutional.

Before everyone creams there pants too much -

All this letter says is that Holder won't be defending Section 3, the section that defines marriage at the Federal level. It will still defend the ability of States to not only define marriage, but ignore other states' and countries' definitions.

Further, Holder makes very clear that the Administration will still follow DOMA until the Courts say otherwise, and indicates that Congress can opt to defend it themselves, which I wouldn't be surprised if they do.

So it's not over, it's just a step on one technical issue. We still have a while to go.

This may not be nailed down yet, but it's still a serious blow- the justice department is no longer defending the idea that marriage is only between a man and woman. This is a big deal. Hell yes!

@19, well, yeah, as a matter of fact, that exact question has just been certified by the California Supreme Court,. So maybe you should have some fucking clue what you're talking about before you shoot your mouth off, eh?

@20: A win is a win.

If you keep spinning it, it's more likely to fall out of your grasp.

What presidents have done similar things with other laws? Has to be asked, for precedent.

Yes!!

fist pump

@25 - Holder lays out precedent in the letter (the long letter) to Boehner. It's not unheard of, just rare.

A lovely step in the right direction in the intimate Cha-Cha of marriage equality. Stay on the dance floor and accept that some clod will stub your toes, everyone. Endurance wins this dance off.

Ps. I'm still drinking a toast though. Now which whisky fits the mood?

Excellent news!! Dominoes are falling...

Urgutha, Laga Gaga is taking credit for the Target about-face, saying she wouldn't let them sell her stuff if they didn't change their policy (can't remember where I read it.)

5280 Sends a message all the same, I think.

Actually, Target has not changed its policy:

http://www.bilerico.com/2011/02/lady_gag…

I think Hilary would have moved quicker on this issue...

"5280 sends a message." Huh? All I want to know is if I should use the same knife for beheading faggots that I use for zombies. Or maybe I need something different, I dunno. I'm drunk, who cares?

Be still my heart...

Great work! Also, what 5, 6, 10, and 28 said. Cheers!

@30,
Crap. Bubble has burst...

A small step, but still progress. As Savage would say, "We're winning."

ACTION NEEDED

President Obama has instructed the Justice Department to cease defending the so-called "Defense of Marriage Act" in federal court.

Please contact the White House to pledge your support to this change in policy.
White House comment line: 202-456-1111
Web-based form: http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact
Email: president@whitehouse.gov

Please contact your Senators and Congressmen as well as Republican House Speaker, John Boehner, to urge them NOT to independently defend this policy in federal court

Contact House Speaker John Boehner
Telephone: 202-225-0600
Web-based form: http://www.speaker.gov/Contact
Email : SpeakerBoehner@mail.house.gov

The Prez was totally waiting for Savage to go on vacation before he made this announcement.

Apropos of Patty Murray, I'd be really surprised if she didn't tow the Obama line (i.e. I don't think she'll unravel the LGBT meeting with "ha! in ya face, suckaz")

5280 Okay, that was a bit "eats, shoots and leaves..." I meant to say: "Yo! You there, 5280! I think Obama's position on DOMA sends a message to the populace at large, whether or not it's legally defensible." Yo.

@39: I don't think Dan would have made this post if he received it as a direct notice from Obama himself ,with a gold-plated personal apology and dance routine thrown in.