I think the cases precedents concerning rational-basis only serve as a useful pretext for the administration’s decision. I doubt that they were the reason for it. They still could have gone on defending the law on “doing our duty” grounds if they had wanted.

In reference to your “so what if it is political?” question, the answer is, well, nothing. As I said twice, it’s still a very welcome development.

But the motivation behind the decision is crucial, I think, to how we evaluate the administration’s performance on gay issues. The Democrats’ rather pitiful performance last congress should not be forgotten. All in all, this change is largely symbolic, and should not get him off the hook. Yes, I too “wish this were being treated by the administration as a political fight”. The motivations behind this decision seem a rather obvious way of explaining their reticence.

Obama campaigned on the positions he holds. He has repeatedly said he will fight for our legal rights, though not the word “marriage”. That he would methodically do so during his presidency, taking up one issue after the other in a calm, logical order is not “suspicious” nor is it “political”. It’s called “governing”.

And Obama didn’t choose the timing. The appearance of gay-rights cases in federal circuits that do not have rational-basis-only review as precedent is what triggered this development.

And so what if it is political? Given the fact that the “fiscally focused” GOP is attacking our legal rights in FOUR states simultaneously this month, would you prefer our side just sit back and take it? I wish this were being treated by the administration as a political fight.

Now that there’s a Republican House to intervene, the process is almost certainly going to be exactly the same–the law will be defended by the federal government. Only now, Obama gets rid of a political liability with his gay base and directs their ire back to the Republicans. Moreover, he knocks the Republicans completely off message on the economy, makes them talk about divisive social issues that they would prefer to ignore.

He takes himself completely out of any backlash the case may generate, no matter how the Supreme Court ultimately rules. If they rule against gay marriage, the Republicans and the Court take the blame from gay people, rather than Obama. If they rule in our favor, only the Court takes the heat from socially conservative people. Since DOMA had a robust defense from the Republican House, no one can blame Obama for the decision because of his refusal to defend the law.

And if, by some miracle, the Republicans decide not to defend the law either and the court rules in our favor, then Boehner, and not Obama, gets blamed by social conservatives. So no matter what the Republican leadership chooses to do, the social conservative and libertarian wings of the party will be angry with each other.

I must say, tactically, it is a masterpiece of political thinking. It completely solves a political problem for the administration and creates one for its opponents all in one fell swoop. Of course, the decision’s welcome, no matter the motivations behind it. But I have my very strong suspicions that if Nancy Pelosi were still Speaker of the House right now, this would not have been the administration’s choice.

..the IRS’s administering the tax code a logitical nightmare, with some gay couples filing as married couples in some jurisdictions while others are barred from doing so elsewhere.

This is already the case. As of the 2010 tax year, registered domestic partners in California (and other community property states) will file their federal income tax returns so as to recognize earned income as being equally divided between the two partners.

Recognizing or non recognizing marriages based on residency is a trivial matter compared to some of the tax code’s complexity.

And currently it’s much worse. Most marriage same-sex couples have to file as married on their state returns and single on their federal.