Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

morningfog

(18,115 posts)
67. Obama showed he could order the DOJ to not defend a law: DOMA.
Sun Feb 19, 2012, 08:08 PM
Feb 2012

The gig is up. He is in charge. What the DOJ pursues, defends or ignores are all products of the Chief Executive.

The President is the head of the Executive Branch Angry Dragon Feb 2012 #1
So the President directs the DoJ? The Doctor. Feb 2012 #5
Yes Angry Dragon Feb 2012 #9
Yes. Obama is the Chief Executive. The DoJ is an Executive body. morningfog Feb 2012 #10
The DoJ "Serves at the Pleasure of The President. bvar22 Feb 2012 #63
It is part of the Executive Branch, of which the President is the head. morningfog Feb 2012 #2
Usually only boards or decision making bodies are completely independent federal entities banned from Kos Feb 2012 #4
The Supreme Court is not a board. It is a separate branch. morningfog Feb 2012 #12
So in your opinion, it was okay for Bush to direct the DoJ as well? The Doctor. Feb 2012 #19
As I pointed out above, morningfog Feb 2012 #26
Uh..who appointed Eric Holder? Who does Holder answer to? Who can fire Eric Holder? Tierra_y_Libertad Feb 2012 #3
So Obama directs Holder? The Doctor. Feb 2012 #6
You tell me why. My guess is that Obama wanted them to defend it. Tierra_y_Libertad Feb 2012 #7
That's a terrible guess, The Doctor. Feb 2012 #8
You are confusing words and actions Angry Dragon Feb 2012 #11
So the fact that Obama opposed DADT in both words AND actions is confusing? The Doctor. Feb 2012 #16
Is he opposing "in words AND actions" warrentless wiretapping? Tierra_y_Libertad Feb 2012 #24
These are your words: Angry Dragon Feb 2012 #25
You really don't understand that? The Doctor. Feb 2012 #30
Where are his actions that he opposed DADT?? Angry Dragon Feb 2012 #34
So, he was just a delicate flower unable to stop his own department from defending it? Tierra_y_Libertad Feb 2012 #13
So you're arguing that the POTUS should direct the DoJ? The Doctor. Feb 2012 #18
Yes. And, take responsibility for what he agrees to. Tierra_y_Libertad Feb 2012 #21
This is more of an exercise. The Doctor. Feb 2012 #23
Fine. Does that prevent Obama from firing Holder for not following his policies? Tierra_y_Libertad Feb 2012 #28
Except that isn't quite right. morningfog Feb 2012 #29
Truly a case of apples and orangutans. The Doctor. Feb 2012 #31
All Departments have the power to push a political agenda. morningfog Feb 2012 #32
With nowhere near the effectiveness of the DoJ. The Doctor. Feb 2012 #89
You have gone round and round. My point is simple. morningfog Feb 2012 #92
Are you saying that the other departments in the executive aren't political? Tierra_y_Libertad Feb 2012 #33
Yes dems_rightnow Feb 2012 #22
I think you are right....I'm not sure Obama was really movonne Feb 2012 #14
Are you saying that the DoJ's defense is part of a plan to do away with wireless wiretapping? Tierra_y_Libertad Feb 2012 #17
LOL. Sounds like a lot of people responding to you need to brush up on their FSogol Feb 2012 #15
The DOJ is not an independent agency. It is a department in the Executive Branch which the Office morningfog Feb 2012 #20
But the president SHOULD NOT interfere and get involved, NYC Liberal Feb 2012 #37
He has a duty to manage the departments. It isn't interference. It is morningfog Feb 2012 #39
"How he does it is up to him." Correct. NYC Liberal Feb 2012 #52
We are in agreement. He is in charge and the direction it takes is on morningfog Feb 2012 #56
Yep. And my opinion, to add to that, is that the president should NYC Liberal Feb 2012 #74
All lawyers are required to exercise independent professional judgment jberryhill Feb 2012 #99
I don't know how many times I have to post this. morningfog Feb 2012 #101
Please explain what you know what everyone else is missing......... Angry Dragon Feb 2012 #27
Doesn't anyone remember when the Bush admin fired all those Justice Dept attorneys? FSogol Feb 2012 #35
Thank You Angry Dragon Feb 2012 #36
Of course he doesn't run the day-to-day. But, he certainly is in charge and Holder morningfog Feb 2012 #38
Some here think that DoJ is a rogue outfit answerable to no one. Tierra_y_Libertad Feb 2012 #40
Like who? The Doctor. Feb 2012 #51
Did the SCOTUS appoint Holder? Does the SCOTUS decide who gets what office at DoJ? Tierra_y_Libertad Feb 2012 #69
Does no one remember Archibald Cox? FSogol Feb 2012 #43
Yes. And, I remember Nixon taking flack for firing him. Tierra_y_Libertad Feb 2012 #44
Cox and Nixon was more akin to Bush and the US Attorney firings. morningfog Feb 2012 #48
Fuck. I remember Bork that night. msanthrope Feb 2012 #86
The argument here is to politicize it! treestar Feb 2012 #58
DOMA morningfog Feb 2012 #61
So why aren't you bashing Obama for not letting it go to court and be declared treestar Feb 2012 #77
In regards to his position on DOMA, I applaud his ordering the DOJ to stand down. morningfog Feb 2012 #80
Then it's OK for Republicans too treestar Feb 2012 #84
Are you saying Obama went too far? morningfog Feb 2012 #85
Or, the POTUS could simply ban warrantless wiretapping...which it has not done. Tierra_y_Libertad Feb 2012 #65
You seem to want the POTUS to do whatever he wants treestar Feb 2012 #78
I want the POTUS to do his job and take responsibility for it. Tierra_y_Libertad Feb 2012 #81
"the President has instructed the DOJ not to defend the statute in such cases" Enrique Feb 2012 #72
From many of these responses, it seems that a lot of people NashvilleLefty Feb 2012 #41
How do you reconcile that with Obama's order to Holder to not defend DOMA? morningfog Feb 2012 #42
Then they are doing what the left wants, and holding up a court decision that it is treestar Feb 2012 #55
they are doing what the President ordered them to do Enrique Feb 2012 #73
OK so Republican Presidents can do the same. treestar Feb 2012 #79
Not correct, I spoke to an attorney that worked on this for the White House. stevenleser Feb 2012 #103
well I spoke to Eric Holder Enrique Feb 2012 #105
Without realizing it you just reinforced my point. You just bolded the wrong part and dont have all stevenleser Feb 2012 #107
my only point was the involvement of the President Enrique Feb 2012 #110
Last time I checked, torture was still illegal.. Fumesucker Feb 2012 #45
That is a very good point. The Doctor. Feb 2012 #47
"Why do so many people continue to insist that the actions of the DoJ are the will of Obama?" Fumesucker Feb 2012 #87
Yes, I did. The Doctor. Feb 2012 #88
Well, the DoJ sometimes acts in the interests of the POTUS.. Fumesucker Feb 2012 #90
It depends on the issue... hughee99 Feb 2012 #46
Or the more likely scenario around here.... Son of Gob Feb 2012 #49
Yes, either way, and this works when repukes get into office too. n/t hughee99 Feb 2012 #53
I know! woo me with science Feb 2012 #50
Cute, but lame. The Doctor. Feb 2012 #59
Whether you think he should or should not direct the DOJ, he can and he does. morningfog Feb 2012 #71
Oh please. The behavior and priorities of his DOJ are entirely consistent woo me with science Feb 2012 #93
The President is the head of it treestar Feb 2012 #54
So, it appears that the government is in favor of warrantless wiretapping. Tierra_y_Libertad Feb 2012 #57
If there is a law that includes warrantless wiretapping treestar Feb 2012 #60
Or, the government could decide not to defend it. Tierra_y_Libertad Feb 2012 #64
Then the next administration, which may be Republican treestar Feb 2012 #76
The executive, no matter what party, may run its own DoJ and maintain the separation of powers. Tierra_y_Libertad Feb 2012 #82
Obama stopped defending DOMA. Please address that. morningfog Feb 2012 #83
"The DOJ will always defend a challenged law" bvar22 Feb 2012 #66
I've been offering up this example, yet it has been ignored. morningfog Feb 2012 #68
That means that law will stay in limbo then treestar Feb 2012 #75
No. bvar22 Feb 2012 #91
Obama showed he could order the DOJ to not defend a law: DOMA. morningfog Feb 2012 #67
You're simply wrong, re: "the government...will always defend a challenged law" nt Romulox Feb 2012 #95
Well, it will tend to, then treestar Feb 2012 #96
It will do so in line with its ideology, since the decision is a political one. Romulox Feb 2012 #97
Nope, its not. You need to speak to any of the lawyers who worked on the DOMA decision stevenleser Feb 2012 #104
Post 102 succinctly refutes this very point. No point rehashing it. nt Romulox Feb 2012 #106
Point 102 has no details at all. Figures you would point to it. nt stevenleser Feb 2012 #108
Might be a 'detail': "President Obama has instructed the Justice Department to stop defending..." Romulox Feb 2012 #109
No. It falls under the executive branch. mmonk Feb 2012 #62
President O is the boss madokie Feb 2012 #70
Attorney General Holder "serves at the pleasure" of the President, so no. Romulox Feb 2012 #94
Yes, now go ask your own lawyer to violate federal rule 11 jberryhill Feb 2012 #100
Is your attorney independent from you? jberryhill Feb 2012 #98
this is not a matter of debate Enrique Feb 2012 #102
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»So is the Department of J...»Reply #67