New CA Attorney General Kamala Harris: "We will not defend Prop 8 because it is unconstitutional"

[Smashcut]

Says Harris:

"Also, maintaining a position that is the right position in saying we will not defend Proposition 8 because it is simply unconstitutional. ... One does not need to run from their convictions when they choose to run for office."

See the video here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fEGmpsw_P-o&feature=player_embedded

Obama and Eric Holder could learn something from CA's new AG.

(via Towleroad)

[eleny]

1. That's how it's done!

K&R

[Hell Hath No Fury]

2. Gee, how hard was THAT?

Obama/Holder take note. :eyes:

[TheWraith]

6. The federal government is bound by different rules than state governments.

How hard is that?

[MNBrewer]

7. so what?

what difference does it make in the case of choosing to appeal the DADT ruling? (And it IS a choice)

[GodlessBiker]

8. What "rules" are those? And why say "rules" and not "laws," unless what you mean ...

by "rules" is really just a loose tradition without and penalties for violating them.

[dsc]

9. no it isn't

It is one thing to point out that since the federal AG isn't elected and thus can't run on a platform of not appealing a case like California's AG did, the things are different. But the fact is there is no rule requiring the feds to appeal any more than there is one requiring the state to appeal. In both cases, most of the time, the AG's appeal but not always.

[Very_Boring_Name]

10. wrong.

[RKP5637]

3. Exactly! "Obama and Eric Holder could learn something from CA's new AG." n/t

[dsc]

4. and no one in CA can complain since she ran on exactly that

it may be why she barely won when Brown and Boxer won decisive victories.

[GodlessBiker]

5. CA's Attorney General (unlike others) is not a potted plant. She actually assesses the ...

constitutionality of matters she is asked to defend. Good for her.

[pinto]

11. Kick

:kick: