Any means necessary: Radical gay left wing activists target lawyers set to defend DOMA

Posted by: ST on April 26, 2011 at 11:40 am

The bullying from left wingers continues, but in this case it’s not union bullying – it’s radical liberals bullying lawyers who are hired to defend laws defining marriage as one man and one woman. Via Jennifer Rubin:

The left has predictably gone batty over the resignation of former solicitor general Paul Clement from the law firm of King and Spalding after the white-shoe firm backed out of its representation of the House of Representatives on the Defense of Marriage Act case. Greg Sargent interviewed a gay rights activist and got a remarkable admission: The left favors politically bullying to deter lawyers from representing clients it doesn’t like:

I just got off the phone with leading gay rights advocate Richard Socarides, who had led the charge against the firm, and he tore into the decision by Clement — the Solicitor General under George W. Bush — by pointing out that it’s folly to present this as a principled stance.

“He tries to make the case that lawyers should represent unpopular causes — but this is not merely an unpopular cause, this is an un-American cause,” Socarides said. “If a lawyer represents an unpopular client who’s defending an important principle, that is what the legal system is about. If the client is unpopular but the principle is important, then it’s important to do.”

“But this is not an important principle,” Socarides continued. “The only principle he wishes to defend is discrimination and second class citizenship for gay Americans. It’s very wrong.”

Socarides made an important point: Even if the House GOP will be able to continue its defense of the law, the decision by King and Spalding signals that defending opposition to gay marriage is now politically toxic with the mainstream, a clear sign of the shift in public opinion on gay rights.

And who will determine what is “important”? Why Socarides, of course. The entire notion is at odds with the left’s usual defense of attorneys who represent all manner of heinous defendants. When conservatives merely wanted to know which Obama Justice Department attorneys had represented al-Qaeda terrorists the hollering was deafening. (McCarthyism! The right of legal representation!) When former White House counsel Greg Craig’s record of representing a long list of unsavory characters came to light liberals didn’t bat an eye.

There really is no stance the left takes on any given issue that they’re not shown to be raving hypocrites shortly thereafter, is it?

Legal eagle John Hinderaker at Power Line adds:

As Clement noted, defense of DOMA is “extremely unpopular in certain quarters.” But lawyers represent unpopular clients and unpopular causes all the time. Many of America’s most prominent law firms lined up to represent terrorists, including those associated with the September 11 attacks, in various legal proceedings. On the left, it is apparently fine to advocate for mass murderers, but not for the House of Representatives or the traditional definition of marriage.

One striking aspect of this incident is that DOMA is not especially unpopular. It may well enjoy the support of most Americans, and, in any event, it is certainly a lot more popular than terrorism. But in elite circles–those that matter to the management of firms like King & Spalding–the radical gay lobby enjoys a special status.

That said, we will never know whether the law firm reversed course out of conviction or cowardice, because there is another difference between this case and the pro bono representation of terrorists: while some may disapprove of the latter representations, they are not crazed. They will not show up in the law firm’s lobby, and they will not take out full-page newspaper ads. Angering ordinary citizens is safe; angering the extreme fringe of the gay lobby is not.

Of course, political blackmail is something uber-leftists know how to utilize especially well, with the mainstream media’s blessing and encouragement, natch. Whatever you think of DOMA, this successful intimidation campaign, waged by thugs who are – contra to the assertions of even some on the right’s side – not on the fringes of the left, is bad news for the future of legal representation when it comes to the defense of so-called “unpopular” conservative positions in a court of law. As William Duncan noted in the National Review link I used earlier:

This follows a campaign of intimidation with threats from law schools and activist groups that retribution would follow if the firm continued to defend the law. This tantrum and its seeming success tell us that many on the left believe they have a veto on the principle that everybody deserves to be represented in court.

Yep. Defending Islamofascist terrorists? Good. Defending traditional marriage? Bad.

Any questions?

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Trackbacks

7 Responses to “Any means necessary: Radical gay left wing activists target lawyers set to defend DOMA”

Comments

  1. Phineas says:

    This is genuinely appalling. It’s a core precept of the legal profession (and our whole legal system) that everyone is entitled to representation in court. In America, it goes back at least as far as John Adams defending British soldiers involved in the Boston Massacre — talk about your unpopular clients!

    This is a bright, shining light on the anti-democratic nature of the Left: they’re not only going to oppose you, they’ll do everything they can to make sure you can’t defend yourself, either, and that you have no voice. I could never, ever, imagine a genuine conservative, committed to the Anglo-American legal tradition, pulling a stunt like this. And it they did, I’d call them on it.

  2. Krystal says:

    Then these lawyers have to show courage and say that any personal attacks or bullying will be met with lawsuits. Otherwise why have a legal system at all? If they blackmail, bully, reveal personal info, on the lawyers then it should be publicized that all lawyers, including leftist ones, will face the same tactic by the right

  3. Mary says:

    This is why the left are not to be trusted, they lie, they trample civil rights, because they do not respect civil rights, or the citizenry. To them, it’s any means to an end, and as in all things the left are in pursuit of, they achieve only one thing, the complete denigration of the human and civil rights they purport to be in aid of.. reducing such concepts to little more than cheap, disposable banners to hide behind.

  4. captaingrumpy says:

    I think everyone on this thread know how I feel about the lawyers,or the bottom feeders as I like to call them. They are scum,and money speaks to them.NOT the cause,but the money.All lawyers should be living in hollywood.
    Congress has more lawyers than any company so why don’t they do it.

  5. Carlos says:

    These bozos took on the wrong profession this time, in the wrong way. What were they thinking? If they had simply withered the lawyer with ad hominems they would have been ok, but any lawyer worth his salt will know that they are a liable target should they choose (or be chosen by a judge) to defend something unpopular with a particular group.

    Not to wish ill on anyone, but I hope he makes it so none of these activists ever has enough money to buy a latte again, ever. Jail time for them wouldn’t be too bad, either.

  6. Michael Teuber says:

    Even tailgunner Joe might wince at a self appointed gender preference advocate arbitrarily deciding what constitute ‘Un-American’ activities. Maybe the House should have a committee look into it. :d