In response to my e-mail calling on him to oppose House Republican plans to use taxpayer dollars to hire an outside law firm to defend the anti-gay Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), Rep. Justin Amash, Tea Party, Mich., said some strange things that I hope someone can make sense of for me.
First, a little background.
As you know, last February, President Obama announced that he had ordered the DOJ to stop defending the constitutionality of DOMA, noting that much of the congressional debate around the law sunk to the level of anti-gay prejudice and that the law targets a specific minority group.
A full two months later, House Speaker John Boehner responded by saying the House would hire lawyers to defend the anti-gay DOMA. This move raised ethical issues as it was revealed that he planned to spend $500,000 of taxpayer dollars to hire a private law firm to push the GOP's anti-gay agenda.
But here's the whacky response from Amash, defending Boehner's move:
The Department of Justice has made a decision not to defend a provision of the Defense of Marriage Act that defines marriage as a legal union between a man and a woman for purposes of interpreting federal law. I support House leadership's subsequent decision to direct the non-partisan office of the House General Counsel to initiate a legal defense of DOMA.
Marriage is a private, religious institution, and I oppose government attempts to redefine it. Because the United States Constitution does not grant the federal government an enumerated power to regulate the institution of marriage, that power falls to the states and to the people. I remain committed to protecting the right of smaller units of government, such as state governments, to set their own policies on these issues.
How does this make sense? Amash apparently has forgotten that DOMA was a 1996 law pushed by conservatives in the federal government to define marriage for every American.
His statement is self-contradictory. He believes the Constitution doesn't give Congress the right to define marriage, but he wants to waste taxpayer dollars defending the federal government's attempt to define marriage. What?
DOMA expressly forbids "smaller units of government" from defining marriage otherwise.
So doesn't it seem as though Amash should actually agree with President Obama here? If he doesn't want the federal government defining marriage, shouldn't he actually oppose Boehner's attempt to force a federal defense of a federal law that defines marriage for everyone?
Amash is no great thinker. As a lawmaker he should do better to understand the law. Unfortunately this issue defines the level of thought that has marked his brief tenure as a member of Congress.