House Republicans' Request To Stop DOMA Challenge Has Failed

Details: Published on Friday, 06 July 2012 16:18; Written by E-Li

judge Vanessa Bryant

A group of republicans, the House Republican-controlled Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group (BLAG), requested for a stay of proceedings for a case challenging the Defense of Marriage Act but failed.

BLAG argued that because another lawsuit, Windsor v. United States, already challenging the section 3 of DOMA which prohibits the federal government from recognizing gay marriages, the second lawsuit, Pedersen v. Office of Personnel Management, should be stopped.

I had already wrote about the case Windsor since it is for this case that a federal judge in New York ruled DOMA unconstitutional (see our article: DOMA Is Unconstitutional For Boston And New York Courts)

U.S. District Court judge Vanessa Bryant (pictured) decided to refuse BLAG's request.

According to Prop8 Trail Tracker, she wrote BLAG has "failed to sustain its burden to establish the need for a stay."

These four factors are: "(1) whether the stay applicant has made a strong showing that he is likely to succeed on the merits; (2) whether the applicant will be irreparably injured absent a stay; (3) whether the issuance of the stay will substantially injure the other parties interested in the proceeding; and (4) where the public interest lies."

The judge also wrote: "The Court finds that the harm which would befall the Plaintiffs if a stay were to be entered is significant. Entering a stay in this matter would essentially deny the Plaintiffs the right to advocate for their own interests, asking them instead to "stand aside while a litigant in another [case] settles the rule of law that will define the rights of both [parties]."

"Lastly, the Court finds that public interest weighs against the entry of a stay in this matter, as the challenge to the constitutionality of Section 3 of DOMA presents an important issue to the nation as a whole such that the Second Circuit and potentially the Supreme Court would benefit from as many opinions and analyses as possible to enrich their review."