Kathleen Kane Has AG Eric Holder on Her Side

Not so lawless after all?

A.G. Kathleen Kane (she of the luminescent teeth) has come under fire from conservatives (even liberals, here at Philly Mag) for refusing to defend the state’s anti-gay marriage law. Now, she’s got an ally in the man who holds the national version of her job.

Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. on Monday injected the Obama administration into the emotional and politicized debate over the future of state same-sex marriage bans, declaring in an interview that state attorneys general are not obligated to defend laws that they believe are discriminatory.

Mr. Holder was careful not to encourage his state counterparts to disavow their own laws, but said that officials who have carefully studied bans on gay marriage could refuse to defend them.

Not that being linked to Eric Holder is going to help her cause among Pennsylvania conservatives. But from a world-historical legacy perspective, she can claim at least partial credit for spurring his opinion on the matter. She’s one of six AGs in the country who are either refusing to defend, or have refused to defend, gay marriage bans.

[New York Times]

Around The Web

Be respectful of our online community and contribute to an engaging conversation. We reserve the right to ban impersonators and remove comments that contain personal attacks, threats, or profanity, or are flat-out offensive. By posting here, you are permitting Philadelphia magazine and Metro Corp. to edit and republish your comment in all media.

  • JT

    The idea that you can ignore a law because you don’t like it or agree with it is a political choice. The AG at both the State and Federal level are charged with enforcing the laws, not making them. If enough people disagree then they should lobby their representative to introduce a bill to change the law. Whether you are for or against an issue has nothing to do with whether the law should be enforced. We have gotten far afield from the rule of law and it will be the downfall of us all.

  • President Alexander Hamilton

    Neither of them are particularly adept at doing their job.

  • bvwredux

    The law can be wrong. It was wrong with the Fugitive Slave Acts. States refused to enforce them. “Rule of Law” does not surmount the adherence to a higher morality.

    Where Holder is way off base is that he advocates for a highly disruptive immoral act, and calls it high morality.

    “Rule of Law” to an American means only rule of moral laws. If a law is immoral it is no valid law. This is not just an outcome of the international court at Nuremburg which tried Germans after WII for crimes against humanity, it is a settled principle in American-English law, yet one that is often ignored or replaced by the amoral evil of “Rule of Law” where that is interpreted to mean if the law is made according to current accepted practice it is valid and must be enforced.

    Homosexual sex is immoral. A society that disrupts the sacred protections of man-woman marriage and family creates poverty and despair for the future. We see that today with the utter destruction of the black family and the raising of the violent, the criminal and the ignorant by struggling single moms trapped in the culture’s muck of tolerating and even celebrating the immoral as virtue.

  • leo smith

    2 (TWO) CRIMINALS. Both are treacherous and treasonous.