Two strongly worded
court orders place President Obama in an awkward position on
the issue of whether the government must provide health
insurance benefits to the same-sex partners of federal
employees,
The New York Times
reports.
In separate instances
of employee grievance resolutions, judges of the federal
appeals court in California said that the same-sex partners of
their employees were entitled to health benefits. This position
challenges the federal Office of Personnel Management, which
has directed insurers not to provide the benefits, citing the
1996 Defense of Marriage Act that defines the word
"spouse" as a person of the opposite sex who is a
husband or wife.
Obama must decide
whether to support the personnel office, and risk disappointing
the liberal base that helped elect him, or support the judges,
and court conservative anger at a time when he needs them to
help advance his daunting domestic agenda.
A White House spokesman
declined to tell
The New York Times
how Obama would proceed if the judges tried to enforce the
orders, although he did reiterate the president's support for
legislative repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act.
As a senator, Obama
sponsored legislation to provide health benefits to same-sex
partners of federal employees. He and John Berry, his openly
gay appointee to head the personnel office, both have endorsed
providing health benefits to same-sex partners of federal
employees.
On the congressional
front, Sen. Joseph Lieberman and Rep. Tammy Baldwin, who is a
lesbian, plan to introduce bills to provide benefits to
same-sex partners of federal employees.
Viral post saying Republicans 'have two daddies now' has MAGA hot and bothered