Tweet
When former Solicitor General Paul Clement’s firm, King & Spalding, was chosen by Speaker of the House John Boehner to represent the interests of those who want the Defense of Marriage Act defended in federal court, after President Obama announced his Administration would no longer defend DOMA, there was a quick (and now successful) grassroots backlash against the firm.
Today, King & Spalding announced they were withdrawing from representation of DOMA in federal court, and senior partner Paul Clement resigned from the firm:
The law firm King & Spalding broke with one of its partners, Paul Clement, on Monday over Clement’s work defending an anti-gay-marriage law.
Clement said he was resigning from his firm, King & Spalding, shortly after it said it had moved to withdraw as counsel in the matter.
Clement said he was not resigning because of any strongly held views over the statute, which prohibits the federal government from recognizing same-sex marriages.
“Instead, I resign out of the firmly-held belief that a representation should not be abandoned because the client’s legal position is extremely unpopular in certain quarters.”
This is a significant victory for LGBT groups that organized to ostracize King & Spalding from civilized company and discourse for accepting a case they did not have to undertake.
The Human Rights Campaign, a gay rights group, said on April 18 the firm “should be ashamed of associating themselves with an effort to deny rights of their fellow citizens.”
HRC had begun efforts to request law schools deny King & Spalding recruiting opportunities if they specifically forbade enterprises that violated their own anti-discrimination policies. Additionally, organizations such as GetEQUAL were getting up public onsite demonstrations against the firm.
Via email, Richard Socarides, of Equality Matters and formerly of the Clinton White House, issued this statement:
“We commend the partners of King & Spalding for rightly recognizing that their participation in furthering discrimination against gay Americans was unacceptable. All Americans deserve access to an attorney, but attorneys need to be held accountable for the clients they voluntarily decide to represent.
Furthermore, Speaker Boehner has an army of in-house legal talent at the House of Representatives who could ably represent his position in court. If he is serious about cutting the deficit he needs to look to his in-house counsel to represent him in these proceedings, instead of spending taxpayer dollars for a service already provided to his office.”
Full statement of Robert D Hayes Jr, chairman of King & Spalding:
“Today the firm filed a motion to withdraw from its engagement to represent the Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group of the House of Representatives on the constitutional issues regarding Section III of the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act. Last week we worked diligently through the process required for withdrawal.
“In reviewing this assignment further, I determined that the process used for vetting this engagement was inadequate. Ultimately I am responsible for any mistakes that occurred and apologize for the challenges this may have created.”
Paul Clement has joined the boutique law firm of PATRIOT Act author Viet Dinh, Bancroft PLLC. The former Bush official called hiring Clement, in a statement to TPM, a ‘no-brainer:’
In an email to TPM, Bancroft PLLC founder Viet Dinh — the former Bush-era Justice Department official primarily responsible for authoring the PATRIOT Act — said that signing Clement was “a no brainer.”
“Paul wins the biggest cases and Bancroft solves the most complex problems,” Viet Dinh said in the email. “Paul brings to Bancroft an unparalleled record of success, integrity and — obviously — demonstrated commitment to the interests of his clients. We cannot be more proud of our new partner.”
Isn’t it great to see the G W Bush band getting back together, to defend discrimination against same-sex loving couples?
35 Comments
In that the withdrawal statement specifically references ‘vetting’ it’s possible the offending part of the contract with Boehner wasn’t the representation itself, but the gag order contained within it forbidding any — *ANY* — member, employee, or associate of K&S from advocating against DOMA.
Here’s Cynthia Tucker on Paul Clement:
Well said, Cynthia.
I wonder if there is precedent when the government is split like this. When, previously, has the Executive decided to abandon the defense of a law it finds unconstitutional, only to have the Legislative branch (or a part thereof; interesting wrinkle there, perhaps?) decide to defend the law?
Has the Legislative branch hired outside counsel in these cases?
And have such contracts in the past required a gag rule on
everyone employed by the outside firm hired to do the work?
Statement from Freedom to Marry’s Evan Wolfson:
“In America, every person deserves a defense, but not every position does. King & Spaulding has recognized what President Obama, the Department of Justice, and many members of Congress have joined Freedom to Marry in concluding: federal marriage discrimination and the so-called ‘Defense of Marriage Act’ are indefensible.”
“Freedom to Marry commends the many voices within the firm and outside, including the Human Rights Campaign, who spoke up against firm’s hasty and wrong-headed decision to take on the defense of discrimination. DOMA is an odious, oppressive law passed to exclude loving and committed couples from equal respect for their marriages; it cannot be defended without reliance on stereotypes and fears that do not stand up under the Constitution. The House leaders pushing this abuse of taxpayer money to find a hired gun to defend DOMA should follow King & Spaulding’s lead and reconsider whether they really want to be on the side of unfairness and the wrong side of history.”
Clement’s (self-typed, clearly) statement leaving K&S:
I suppose it’s easier to enforce the anti-free-speech clause in the contract when all six (now seven) attorneys are former G W Bush loyalists and appointees.
Statement from The Boehn:
House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) spokesman Brendan Buck said they were pleased that Clement would still be representing the House. “The Speaker is disappointed in the firm’s decision and its careless disregard for its responsibilities to the House in this constitutional matter,” said Buck in a statement. “At the same time, Mr. Clement has demonstrated legal integrity, and we are grateful for his decision to continue representing the House.
This move will ensure the constitutionality of this law is appropriately determined by the courts, rather than by the President unilaterally.”
Statement from Courage Campaign:
*Courage Campaign Reacts to King & Spaulding Dropping Defense of
Discriminatory “Defense of Marriage Act”*
*Chairman Rick Jacobs applauds decision of firm to join the right side of
history*
*Los Angeles: *Courage Campaign Chairman Rick Jacobs, head of the 700,000
member organization, released the following statement in reaction to the
announcement from the law firm, King & Spaulding, that they would not be
defending the “Defense of Marriage Act” on behalf of the U.S. House of
Representatives:
*“Mr. Boehner should simply turn to Charles Cooper, whose defense of Prop 8
amounted to ‘Your honor, we do not need evidence,’” said Courage Campaign
Chairman and Founder Rick Jacobs. “The proponents lost because they had no
case, just as Mr. Boehner will lose because he has no case regardless of
which firm or lawyer joins his fight against America.”*
*“King & Spaulding decided to join the right side of history today. We
encourage Speaker Boehner to drop this wasteful use of public funds and get
on with the business of the country,” Jacobs concluded.*
King & Spaulding had agreed last week to represent the U.S. House of
Representatives, at a cost of over $500,000 to taxpayers. Courage Campaign
Institute extensively covered the “Defense of Marriage Act” trials and Prop
8 case on its blog, Prop8TrialTracker.com, now the #1 Google search result
for “Prop 8 trial.”
Last month, Courage Campaign joined with Sen. Feinstein and Rep. Nadler to
introduce the “Respect for Marriage Act,” legislation that would repeal the
Defense of Marriage Act. Both members of Congress penned e-mails to Courage
Campaign’s 700,000 members asking them to join the campaign. As of this
release, over 53,000 individuals have signed up for the long-term campaign,
including volunteer state captains in 30 states. In addition, Courage
Campaign successfully targeted and picked up the votes of Sens. Klobuchar
(D-MN) and Kohl (D-WI), giving equality advocates the 10 votes they need to
pass repeal through the Senate Judiciary Committee.
*Courage Campaign *is a multi-issue online organizing network that empowers
more than 700,000 grassroots and netroots supporters to work for progressive
change and full equality in California and across the country. Through a
one-of-a-kind online tool called Testimony: Take A
Stand,
the Courage Campaign is chronicling the sights, sounds and stories of LGBT
families and all who wage a daily struggle against discrimination across
America. For more information about Testimony, please visit,
http://www.couragecampaign.org/testimony
Thanks for that quote. I was just pondering something along those lines. Even the worst & most vile of serial murderers, rapists, etc, deserve representation at trial.
However, “defending” bigotry in order to prevent a class of citzens from their *civil rights* is not the same thing by a long shot.
Kudos to the citizens for putting appropriate pressure on King & Spaulding, and kudos to the law firm for stepping up to do the correct thing and dump this.
“Isn’t it great to see the G W Bush band getting back together, to defend discrimination against same-sex loving couples?”
I realize you’re saying that ironically, Teddy, but it’s just so typical, isn’t it? These scum-sucking bottom-dwellers will do any sleazy thing to make a buck. It’s definitely a gain for King & Spaulding to be rid of Clement.
Thanks for the update on this. Very interesting, indeed.
It is as if they find little rocks under which to cluster, keeping themselves out of the sunlight of anti-discrimination and integrity. And they welcome new trolls to their under-dwellingplaces.
Clement said he was not resigning because of any strongly held views over the statute, which prohibits the federal government from recognizing same-sex marriages.
“Instead, I resign out of the firmly-held belief that a representation should not be abandoned because the client’s legal position is extremely unpopular in certain quarters.”
Bullshit he was forced out he cost the firm money both from the threatened boycott and future bad publicity that would have cost the firm more cash. Or is he saying that firms that go against Gays face more backlash than firms that defend serial killers and Nazi War criminals pro bono?
I thought the silent majority hated Gay Marriage is he saying different?
Or maybe don’t laugh he is saying his firm is more ethical than him?
I am ok with all 3 possibilities.
HRC had begun efforts to request law schools deny King & Spalding recruiting opportunities if they specifically forbade enterprises that violated their own anti-discrimination policies. Additionally, organizations such as GetEQUAL were getting up public onsite demonstrations against the firm.
Economic boycotts work if you want real change threaten the GOP where it hurts what they most care about their cash.
Cenk just did a great job on this story…! Key point: The Progressives really need to take a cue from the LBGT community’s methodology…! Must-See Tee-Vee..! ;-)
Paul Clement has joined the boutique law firm of PATRIOT Act author Viet Dinh, Bancroft PLLC. The former Bush official called hiring Clement, in a statement to TPM, a ‘no-brainer:’
In an email to TPM, Bancroft PLLC founder Viet Dinh — the former Bush-era Justice Department official primarily responsible for authoring the PATRIOT Act — said that signing Clement was “a no brainer.”
“Paul wins the biggest cases and Bancroft solves the most complex problems,” Viet Dinh said in the email. “Paul brings to Bancroft an unparalleled record of success, integrity and — obviously — demonstrated commitment to the interests of his clients. We cannot be more proud of our new partner.”
Isn’t it great to see the G W Bush band getting back together, to defend discrimination against same-sex loving couples?
He wins cases but costs the firms clients and almost got them banned from recruiting at the best law schools his old firm if they had kept him would have been reduced to hiring Regency University Grads. They might have been forced to hire… (the Horror ) Gonzo!
Lets see if he wins the DOMA case if he’s a winner.
Speaker of the House John Boehner to represent the interests of those who want the Defense of Marriage Act defended in federal court
The Orange One is cheap just look at how fake his tan is he can afford better but doesn’t. Is he having tax payers pay for this?
Why, yes he did do a great job. He was singing my song!
Yeah, I think it is a rather easy distinction to make.
It’s certainly not the case that John Boehner is a hated and reviled plaintiff unable to obtain representation. He has inhouse lawyers, and there are — ahem — a number of attorneys in his caucus whose firms would be very happy to take this on. The Boehn was looking to ‘trade up’ by having a former Solicitor General represent his bigoted view.
Cenk is really distinguishing himself on MSNBC.
Because nothing says “honorable course” like defending bigotry and intolerance.
I think that next rock to examine is the PATRIOT Act.
Should be interesting to see what Rachel has to say about it too…! ;-)
Teddy, the agreement that Clement signed with the House of Representatives said that Clement will be the lead attorney on the case, but it also mentions two other K&S partners, Daryl L. Joseffer and Jeffrey S. Bucholtz, who “will perform a substantial portion of the services contracted for in the Agreement.”
Have you seen anything about these two? Have they followed Clement and the case to his new firm, or are they sticking with K&S?
True its not like this issue has any merit besides the bible’s bigotry and intolerance. I don’t see how society is harmed or what compelling interest society has in stopping gay marriage.
Unless they have some more crap arguments to throw out I have not heard yet.
LMAO! Manatee Gallagher’s group is launching “an investigation” of K&S and threatening “disciplinary complaints”
ifwhen they are found to be in the wrong.No word on who died and left NOM in charge of legal ethics instead of the relevant Bar Associations.
Good catch did the firm really withdraw if 2 others members who may still be with the firm are staying on with the case. Are they trying to Con us did they think we would not find out?
Trust me, it’ll be the same old shit repackaged in s shiny, new box.
Just what can Maggie do if she finds anything wrong? Does she have subpoena power? Can she impose punishment?
Well Reading their *cough logical * arguments always gives us good snark:)
The Patriot Act will live in infamy….nice coincidence for the 2 guys to hang together. Discrimination and abuse of power….nice.
The firm withdrew. They filed all the appropriate motions with the court to have their names taken off the case. That’s official.
If 2 partners are still connected to the firm are still on the case then they are trying to Con us did they also leave the firm if not this is very lame and Obvious.
Gallagher! Ha!
My Two Cents: Wedding Bell Boos
May they all rot n the hells of their own making.
Great update Teddy, thanks for your work.
Rcc’d, of course.
I haven’t seen anything on this, but my sense is that if they are still on the case, then they left the firm too. From the looks of the agreement signed by Clement and the House lawyers, Clement was in charge of the case and these were the two K&S lawyers that he would be working most closely with.
If they were simply assigned to the case, then there’s no big deal in taking them off it. If they begged and pleaded with Clement to be included, then they may have gone with him.
Either way, I don’t think King & Spalding is trying to con anyone. They’ve had enough of this mess, and they’re quite happy to let someone else take it on.