DOJ Reportedly To Meet With LGBT Groups

Jim Burroway

June 19th, 2009

In the wake of the nationwide anger being expressed over the Justice Department’s insulting court brief defending the so-called “Defense of Marriage Act,” the Obama administration has begun to react with some very limited, short term steps to try to assuage that anger. On Wednesday, President Barack Obama signed a Presidential Memorandum directing federal agencies to adopt policies to treat their LGBT employees on equal footing with their other employees. (That memorandum, however, doesn’t include key employment benefits like health care or retirement, which are prohibited by federal law.) The White House has also directed the Census Bureau to determine changes in its procedures to allow same-sex unions to be counted.

Both steps however are very tiny steps, and they have done little to quell the outrage over the DOJ’s brief. That anger continues to threaten the Democratic National Committee’s LGBT fundraiser slated for next week.

Now The Plum Line blog is reporting that the Justice Department has scheduled a private meeting with major LGBT groups for next week:

Tracy Russo, a spokesperson for Justice, confirmed the meeting to me, after I posted below that top gay rights lawyers were miffed that administration lawyers had rebuffed their requests to meet and discuss ongoing litigation involving DOMA.

At the meeting — which hasn\’t been announced and is expected to include leading gay rights groups like GLAD and Lambda Legal — both sides are expected to hash out how to proceed with pending DOMA cases.

The Justice Department is due to file another brief by June 29 in a lawsuit filed by Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders in Boston\’s Federal District Court on behalf of eight married couples and three surviving spouses from Massachusetts who have been denied federal legal protections available to spouses. That DOMA challenge, Gill v. Office of Personel Management is considered a much stronger suit than Smelt v. United States, which the recent controversial DOJ brief addressed.

I don’t know whether LGBT groups would be permitted to weigh in on Gill v. OPM specifically. But if this meeting really does happen, it does appear to be a sign that the Justice Department may try to head off the kind of missteps it made with its Smelt v. US filing.

And if that’s the case, then it appears that the Obama Administration may have begun to recover its sense of hearing. But the only lesson I think we can safely draw from all of this is to keep shouting.


June 19th, 2009

I apologize if this was already discussed, I just didn’t see it. But I wonder about the following scenario:

1) Bush et al fill the DOJ with conservative Christians at all levels; 2) Obama moves in but does not replace people at all levels; 3) the DOJ has to make a filing on DOMA and it happens to be conservative Christians who get to do it; 4) the notorious filing comes out filled with anti-gay rhetoric that is consistent with conservative Christian rhetoric; 5) gays are outraged; 6) Obama is clueless why gays are upset; 7) and here we are.

It makes sense to me, but I haven’t looked as carefully at all the issues as others, so I’m predisposed to be mistaken.

Lindoro Almaviva

June 19th, 2009


Good guess, but then why do we have a secretary of Justice? Isn’t he supposed to lead? I am not saying that he needs to micromanage everything that happens there, but as the nations Top lawyer, shouldn’t he have had meetings with the team that was preparing the filing? Shouldn’t he been briefed on the contents of such filing so he could steer the boat in the direction that the Government wanted?

Am I way off base here?


June 19th, 2009

We have all learned a good lesson through McClurkin, Rev. Warren, the DADT dismissals and the DoMA brief. Nobody has ever gotten civil right by quietly sitting on the side lines and waiting.

Nobody else is sitting on the sidelines quietly waiting their turn. In a representative democracy, we need to keep the pressure on our representatives (and president) to remind them that we are still here and we are not going away. In many ways, the ongoing missteps of the Obama Administration has been exactly what GLBTs needed in order to get angry, get organized and demand our rights. The Prop 8 loss in CA didn’t hurt either.


June 19th, 2009

I myself am not ready to accept excuses and at this point the only remedy is action on the equality that was promised!

We were told that the president’s plate was too full to deal with gay equality issues and yet there was time to prepare a hate filled filing. If this was not what the president wanted filed then those who did this need to loose their jobs!


June 19th, 2009

The other John make a good point we can not be quiet any longer. The only reason there has been ANY action this week is because the MSM is picking up and reporting the anger of the community!

Scott P.

June 19th, 2009

Lindoro Almoviva,

There is no secretary of Justice. The position you’re referring to is Attorney General. Mr. Obama’s Attorney General is Edmund G. Brown. He’s the man who would have okayed this brief. And since it’s a presidential appointment, Mr. Obama is responsible for what it contains, no matter who wrote it.

All these people who keep making the excuse that the President is too busy to deal with our matters seem to forget the White House has an ENORMOUS bureaucracy to deal with everything from nuclear war to the patterns on the dinnerware. All he had to do was say what he wanted and it would get done. He’s chosen to ignore us and needs to be shown we won’t take this crap anymore.


June 19th, 2009

@Scott P.: Wait, Edmund G. Brown, a.k.a. Jerry Brown? That’s California’s AG. I think you mean U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder.

Scott P.

June 19th, 2009

Oops! Damn! My google search was off, REALLY off! Thanks for the correction.


June 19th, 2009

I’m not ready to forgive until this Scott Simpson, the actual author of the brief, is no longer working at the DOJ.


June 19th, 2009

this insulting court brief is more than just that… some parts are as repugnant and ignorant as those coming from pat robertsons mouth.

The most important things i got out of this were:
1) Two men marrying is not like two black ppl marrying.
2) Two men marrying is like a child and an adult marrying, or a sister and a brother marrying.

And i was surfing around about this topic i came across this paragraph which necesarily grabs ones attention and i aint sure to what extent this is true…

“DOMA Is Consistent with Equal Protection and Due Process Principles.” This is important because it means that Obama wasn’t content to simply argue, based on technicalities, that this case should be thrown out. He went out of his way to argue that DOMA is actually constitutional, and then went into detail destroying every single constitutional argument we have for opposing DOMA in court. This will screw us on every lawsuit we file on every gay issue, in every public policy debate we have in the states on any gay issue.


June 20th, 2009

Making excuses for the dear one will no longer fly. He is the president, he is responsible, period. This is his administration and they speak for him.

This is the man with the homophobes on parade during the election. Give me a break! I will no longer tolerate apologist for him.

You’re in Denial, wake up.

Leave A Comment

All comments reflect the opinions of commenters only. They are not necessarily those of anyone associated with Box Turtle Bulletin. Comments are subject to our Comments Policy.

(Required, never shared)

PLEASE NOTE: All comments are subject to our Comments Policy.


Latest Posts

The Things You Learn from the Internet

"The Intel On This Wasn't 100 Percent"

From Fake News To Real Bullets: This Is The New Normal

NC Gov McCrory Throws In The Towel

Colorado Store Manager Verbally Attacks "Faggot That Voted For Hillary" In Front of 4-Year-Old Son

Associated Press Updates "Alt-Right" Usage Guide

A Challenge for Blue Bubble Democrats

Baptist Churches in Dallas, Austin Expelled Over LGBT-Affirming Stance

Featured Reports

What Are Little Boys Made Of?

In this original BTB Investigation, we unveil the tragic story of Kirk Murphy, a four-year-old boy who was treated for “cross-gender disturbance” in 1970 by a young grad student by the name of George Rekers. This story is a stark reminder that there are severe and damaging consequences when therapists try to ensure that boys will be boys.

Slouching Towards Kampala: Uganda’s Deadly Embrace of Hate

When we first reported on three American anti-gay activists traveling to Kampala for a three-day conference, we had no idea that it would be the first report of a long string of events leading to a proposal to institute the death penalty for LGBT people. But that is exactly what happened. In this report, we review our collection of more than 500 posts to tell the story of one nation’s embrace of hatred toward gay people. This report will be updated continuously as events continue to unfold. Check here for the latest updates.

Paul Cameron’s World

In 2005, the Southern Poverty Law Center wrote that “[Paul] Cameron’s ‘science’ echoes Nazi Germany.” What the SPLC didn”t know was Cameron doesn’t just “echo” Nazi Germany. He quoted extensively from one of the Final Solution’s architects. This puts his fascination with quarantines, mandatory tattoos, and extermination being a “plausible idea” in a whole new and deeply disturbing light.

From the Inside: Focus on the Family’s “Love Won Out”

On February 10, I attended an all-day “Love Won Out” ex-gay conference in Phoenix, put on by Focus on the Family and Exodus International. In this series of reports, I talk about what I learned there: the people who go to these conferences, the things that they hear, and what this all means for them, their families and for the rest of us.

Prologue: Why I Went To “Love Won Out”
Part 1: What’s Love Got To Do With It?
Part 2: Parents Struggle With “No Exceptions”
Part 3: A Whole New Dialect
Part 4: It Depends On How The Meaning of the Word "Change" Changes
Part 5: A Candid Explanation For "Change"

The Heterosexual Agenda: Exposing The Myths

At last, the truth can now be told.

Using the same research methods employed by most anti-gay political pressure groups, we examine the statistics and the case studies that dispel many of the myths about heterosexuality. Download your copy today!

And don‘t miss our companion report, How To Write An Anti-Gay Tract In Fifteen Easy Steps.

Testing The Premise: Are Gays A Threat To Our Children?

Anti-gay activists often charge that gay men and women pose a threat to children. In this report, we explore the supposed connection between homosexuality and child sexual abuse, the conclusions reached by the most knowledgeable professionals in the field, and how anti-gay activists continue to ignore their findings. This has tremendous consequences, not just for gay men and women, but more importantly for the safety of all our children.

Straight From The Source: What the “Dutch Study” Really Says About Gay Couples

Anti-gay activists often cite the “Dutch Study” to claim that gay unions last only about 1½ years and that the these men have an average of eight additional partners per year outside of their steady relationship. In this report, we will take you step by step into the study to see whether the claims are true.

The FRC’s Briefs Are Showing

Tony Perkins’ Family Research Council submitted an Amicus Brief to the Maryland Court of Appeals as that court prepared to consider the issue of gay marriage. We examine just one small section of that brief to reveal the junk science and fraudulent claims of the Family “Research” Council.

Daniel Fetty Doesn’t Count

Daniel FettyThe FBI’s annual Hate Crime Statistics aren’t as complete as they ought to be, and their report for 2004 was no exception. In fact, their most recent report has quite a few glaring holes. Holes big enough for Daniel Fetty to fall through.