More on the OPM decision to deny benefits to wife of lesbian. Lambda Legal asks: ” “What is the Obama administration’s analysis?”

On Friday, John posted the press release from Lambda Legal, which blasted OPM’s decision to deny a federal judge’s order to provide benefits to the wife of a lesbian employee in California. Today, Kerry Eleveld has more from the Director of Lambda Legal’s Marriage Project, Jennifer Pizer. Clearly, OPM had an option to follow the judge’s order, but chose to argue that the judge wasn’t acting as a judge when he issued the ruling. Pizer was having none of that:

But Pizer, director of Lambda Legal’s Marriage Project, roundly rejected that assertion since Kozinski is a sitting federal judge. “Is it possible for Judge Kozinski to be acting in some capacity other than as an Article III judge?” she questioned, “We think when he’s sitting in an employee grievance procedure, he is an Article III judge, that’s the only capacity he has.”

That’s just one problem with this issue, according to Lambda Legal’s Pizer. The other concern strikes at the core of the Obama administration’s legal argument, or lack thereof:

But Pizer was even more troubled by the fact that OPM chose to present its conclusion by issuing a public statement rather than actually countering Kozinski’s rationale in a legal brief.

“They’re stating their position via press statements,” said Pizer. “If they have confidence in their analysis, they should do what people do in legal proceedings.”

In the case, Kozinski argued for a separation of powers — saying that if the judiciary has the inherent power under the U.S. Constitution to regulate itself, then it has to be the case that employees of an executive branch agency (OPM in this case) do not have superior authority to dictate what goes on in the judicial branch.

“They’ve said they disagree but they’ve never deigned to explain why. They’ve never written that analysis,” Pizer said of OPM, which took its cues in the case from the Department of Justice.

“What is the Obama administration’s analysis for why the ninth circuit doesn’t have the constitutional authority to regulate its own employee practices?”

What is the legal analysis. Perhaps the Department of Justice could get those DOMA lawyers to explain this. And, doesn’t DOJ have an LGBT liaison?

What is clear is that this decision by the Obama administration wasn’t made lightly. Given the sensitivity of LGBT related issues within Team Obama, all of the players, OPM, the Department of Justice and people in the White House, had to sign off on this decision. I thought the judge was handing the Obama administration a gift. OPM could have followed his order. And, OPM could have explained that this order came from a conservative Reagan appointee to show just how much this issue has changed.

But, that’s not what happened.


On October 27, 2010, Joe was one of five bloggers who interviewed President Obama. Joe is a DC-based political consultant with over twenty-five years of experience at both the state and federal level. Joe has managed political operations and legislative efforts for both candidates and issues-based organizations. For seven years, he was the Director of State Legislation at Handgun Control, Inc. He served as that organization's first Political Director during the 2000 cycle. Joe is a graduate of the University of Maine School of Law. In addition, he has a Masters in Public Administration from Lehigh University and received his B.A. from the University of New Hampshire. Joe also has a fun dog, Petey, a worthy successor to Boomer, who got Joe through eight years of Bush and Cheney. Joe likes to think he is a world class athlete having finished the 2005 Chicago Marathon in the time of 4:10. He has completed six other marathons as well -- and is still determined to break the four hour mark.

Share This Post

© 2014 AMERICAblog News. All rights reserved. · Entries RSS