(Updated) Law Firm, King and Spalding, Fighting For DOMA Backs Out Of Case - Thank You Coca Cola - Bancroft is the New Firm And Protests Move To Bancroft

  • metta

    Posts: 39143

    Apr 22, 2011 3:49 PM GMT
    UPDATE:

    Clement firm drops DOMA case
    http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0411/Clement_firm_drops_DOMA_case.html


    http://joemygod.blogspot.com/2011/04/tweet-of-day.html


    Law Firm Fighting For DOMA Faces Backlash From Legal Groups, Colleges

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/22/law-firm-defense-marriage-backlash-legal-colleges_n_852050.html
  • metta

    Posts: 39143

    Apr 22, 2011 3:58 PM GMT
    Contract with King & Spalding bars all employees of the international law firm from advocating for repeal of DOMA



    http://www.metroweekly.com/news/?ak=6167
  • metta

    Posts: 39143

    Apr 25, 2011 4:30 AM GMT



    LGBT Activists to Protest Law Firm King & Spalding for Defending DOMA Cases

    http://lezgetreal.com/2011/04/lgbt-activists-to-protest-law-firm-king-spalding-for-defending-doma-cases/

    Protests against KING and SPALDING will be held in San Francisco at – Weds 27 April – check FB for details…

    101 Second Street
    Suite 2300
    San Francisco, CA 94105
    Wednesday April 27th @11:30AM to 1:00PM

    BRING MARRIAGE EQUALITY SIGNS OR JUST YOURSELF.
    By the way here are the rest of their Local and International presence. Perhaps the UK LGBT community would like to protest with us. After Prince William’s wedding of course…

    ATLANTA
    1180 Peachtree Street, NE
    Atlanta, GA 30309
    T: +1 404 572 4600
    AUSTIN
    401 Congress Avenue
    Suite 3200
    Austin, TX 78701
    T: +1 512 457 2000

    CHARLOTTE
    100 N Tryon Street
    Suite 3900
    Charlotte, NC 28202
    T: +1 704 503 2600

    DUBAI
    Al Fattan Currency House
    Tower 2, Level 24
    DIFC | Dubai International Financial Centre
    P.O. Box 506547
    Dubai
    United Arab Emirates
    T: +971 4 377 9900

    FRANKFURT
    Taunusanlage 1
    60329 Frankfurt am Main
    Germany
    T: +49 69 257 811 000

    GENEVA
    7 Quai du Mont Blanc
    CH-1201 Geneva
    Switzerland
    T: +41 22 591 0800

    HOUSTON
    1100 Louisiana Street
    Suite 4000
    Houston, TX 77002
    T: +1 713 751 3200

    LONDON
    125 Old Broad Street
    London, EC2N 1AR
    T: +44 20 7551 7500

    NEW YORK
    1185 Avenue of the Americas
    New York, NY 10036
    T: +1 212 556 2100
    PARIS
    65-67 avenue des Champs Elysées
    Paris 75008
    France
    T: +33 1 7300 3900

    RIYADH
    Kingdom Centre
    20th Floor
    2239 Orouba Road, Olayya
    Unit 5
    Riyadh, 12214-9597
    Saudi Arabia
    T: +966 1 211 0034

    SAN FRANCISCO
    101 Second Street
    Suite 2300
    San Francisco, CA 94105
    T: +1 415 318 1200

    SILICON VALLEY
    333 Twin Dolphin Drive
    Suite 400
    Redwood Shores, CA 94065
    T: +1 650 590 0700

    SINGAPORE
    9 Raffles Place #31-01
    Republic Plaza
    Singapore 048619
    T: +65 6303 6000

    WASHINGTON, D.C.
    1700 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
    Suite 200
    Washington, D.C. 20006
    T: +1 202 737 0500
  • metta

    Posts: 39143

    Apr 25, 2011 4:31 AM GMT


    Blowback: Nothing defensible about DOMA

    http://opinion.latimes.com/opinionla/2011/04/blowback-nothing-defensible-about-doma.html?cid=6a00d8341c7de353ef014e880a59f4970d
  • Menergy_1

    Posts: 737

    Apr 25, 2011 1:25 PM GMT
    From Joe.My.God blogsite: Maggie Gallagher Pissed at HRC for Attack Against Law Firm's Contract to Defend DOMA


    "Is everyone entitled to a lawyer? Not in HRC's eyes. HRC is openly attempting to hurt an entire law firm, because one of its lawyers took on a client HRC does not like: the House's defense of the Defense of Marriage Act. This kind of thing has been done behind the scenes many times--the use of class power behind the scenes to punish those who disagree with HRC on marriage. (I just spoke to the wife of a litigator in San Francisco who lost his job--was denied a partnership--because he donated to Prop 8.) But this is even worse, and very public: the attempt to punish an entire business enterprise because a lawyer defends what is in HRC's eyes an unpopular client. Will the legal culture permit HRC to tell it who can hire a lawyer? We'll see." - Maggie Gallagher, writing for NOM's blog.

    View the HRC's campaign against King & Spalding.
    http://www.hrcbackstory.org/2011/04/hrc-campaigning-to-to-inform-clients-recruits-that-king-spalding-defends-discrimination/


    It seems she thinks "everyone" (i.e., a person as referred to in the Constitution/Bill of Rights) = an inanimate US law....(kinda like the Supreme Court ruling that corporations are equivalent to "persons" when it comes to free speech/poitical campaign contributions, support.) However, there is no automatic "right to defense in court" for a law -- which has already been ruled in part unconstitutional anyway in federal court.
  • TrentGrad

    Posts: 1541

    Apr 25, 2011 1:32 PM GMT
    Menergy_1 saidFrom Joe.My.God blogsite: Maggie Gallagher Pissed at HRC for Attack Against Law Firm's Contract to Defend DOMA


    "Is everyone entitled to a lawyer? Not in HRC's eyes. HRC is openly attempting to hurt an entire law firm, because one of its lawyers took on a client HRC does not like: the House's defense of the Defense of Marriage Act. This kind of thing has been done behind the scenes many times--the use of class power behind the scenes to punish those who disagree with HRC on marriage. (I just spoke to the wife of a litigator in San Francisco who lost his job--was denied a partnership--because he donated to Prop 8.) But this is even worse, and very public: the attempt to punish an entire business enterprise because a lawyer defends what is in HRC's eyes an unpopular client. Will the legal culture permit HRC to tell it who can hire a lawyer? We'll see." - Maggie Gallagher, writing for NOM's blog.

    View the HRC's campaign against King & Spalding.
    http://www.hrcbackstory.org/2011/04/hrc-campaigning-to-to-inform-clients-recruits-that-king-spalding-defends-discrimination/


    It seems she thinks "everyone" (i.e., a person as referred to in the Constitution/Bill of Rights) = an inanimate US law....(kinda like the Supreme Court ruling that corporations are equivalent to "persons" when it comes to free speech/poitical campaign contributions, support.) However, there is no automatic "right to defense in court" for a law -- which has already been ruled in part unconstitutional anyway in federal court.


    Her point is asinine!

    Seriously, the HRC has the right to exercise it's own free speech when it feels a business, or in this case a law firm, is supporting something which impacts upon it's right to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness!"

    The law firm has the right to defend DOMA if they so choose.

    And the HRC has the right to mount a campaign, based honestly of course, to destroy that law firm just as that law firm is defending a law which destroys the rights of those it targets!

    I hope they succeed, and the lawyers representing DOMA find themselves unable to even find a job flipping burgers after the HRC is done!
  • Menergy_1

    Posts: 737

    Apr 25, 2011 1:55 PM GMT
    I neglected in my post to mention Maggie's completely ignoring the glaring inconsistency/hypocrisy of the law firm which touts its LGBT employees' equal treatment, while one of its head lawyers takes on the case/House contract to defend discrimination in the US population (and the firm's own LGBT staff - who are prevented by this contract from advocating against DOMA.....)
  • metta

    Posts: 39143

    Apr 25, 2011 4:36 PM GMT

    Clement firm drops DOMA case


    http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0411/Clement_firm_drops_DOMA_case.html
  • metta

    Posts: 39143

    Apr 25, 2011 5:26 PM GMT
    Defense of Marriage Act defender resigns from law firm amid pressure from gay rights advocates

    http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-doma-lawyer-20110425,0,2831886.story


    The new law firm that will defent DOMA, Bancroft:

    http://www.bancroftpllc.com/contact.htm


    THE NEW FIRM CONTACT INFO HERE.

    BANCROFT PLLC
    1919 M Street, NW / Suite 470
    Washington, D.C. 20036
    Tel: (202) 234-0090
    Fax: (202) 234-2806
    bancroft@bancroftpllc.com

    Paul Clement
    pclement@bancroftpllc.com (not verified yet)

    Viet Dinh
    vdinh@bancroftpllc.com

    Christopher Bartolomucci
    cbartolomucci@bancroftpllc.com

    Brian Field
    bfield@bancroftpllc.com

    Nathan Sales
    nsales@bancroftpllc.com

    Lizette Benedi Herraiz
    lbherraiz@bancroftpllc.com

    Samuel Lipson
    slipson@bancroftpllc.com
  • metta

    Posts: 39143

    Apr 26, 2011 2:08 AM GMT
    Behind A Major Law Firm's Decision To Ditch Its Defense Of DOMA


    Thank you

    biz%2520-%2520Coca-Cola_logo5.jpg


    Behind A Major Law Firm's Decision To Ditch Its Defense Of DOMA

    [QUOTE]
    Sources with knowledge of the backlash confirm that one of King & Spalding's top clients, Coca Cola, also based in Atlanta, directly intervened to press the firm to extricate itself from the case.
    [/QUOTE]

    http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/04/behind-a-major-law-firms-decision-to-ditch-its-defense-of-doma.php?ref=fpa
  • metta

    Posts: 39143

    Apr 26, 2011 2:16 AM GMT
    Protests move to Bancroft:

    http://gay.americablog.com/2011/04/getequal-protests-bancroft-pllc-over.html
  • metta

    Posts: 39143

    Apr 26, 2011 8:24 PM GMT
    Firestorm After Law Firm Drops Out of DOMA Fight


    http://video.foxnews.com/v/4663477/firestorm-after-law-firm-drops-out-of-doma-fight/
  • metta

    Posts: 39143

    Apr 27, 2011 3:54 AM GMT

    Law firm was reportedly in "mayhem" over decision to take DOMA case

    http://networkedblogs.com/h8Ftt
  • metta

    Posts: 39143

    Apr 30, 2011 1:11 AM GMT



    Ken Cuccinelli Drops Law Firm King & Spalding For Its 'Obsequious Act Of Weakness' On DOMA

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/29/ken-cuccinelli-king-spalding-doma_n_855406.html
  • metta

    Posts: 39143

    May 08, 2011 3:03 AM GMT

    DOMA's New Lawyers: "Some Good Americans"


    [QUOTE]
    clause in the agreement is one that in which the Bancroft firm pledges that it "will not discriminate in its performance of this agreement because of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, disability or any other prohibited basis, and shall comply with all applicable employment laws."

    Of course, the basic purpose of the representation is to undertake advocacy that affirmatively discriminates on the basis of sexual orientation -- so isn't it quaint that the General Counsel's office of the House of Representatives insists that the firm not discriminate on any other grounds while doing so?
    [/QUOTE]


    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/katherine-franke/some-good-americans-domas_b_857785.html
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 08, 2011 11:37 PM GMT
    metta8 said
    DOMA's New Lawyers: "Some Good Americans"


    [QUOTE]
    clause in the agreement is one that in which the Bancroft firm pledges that it "will not discriminate in its performance of this agreement because of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, disability or any other prohibited basis, and shall comply with all applicable employment laws."

    Of course, the basic purpose of the representation is to undertake advocacy that affirmatively discriminates on the basis of sexual orientation -- so isn't it quaint that the General Counsel's office of the House of Representatives insists that the firm not discriminate on any other grounds while doing so?



    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/katherine-franke/some-good-americans-domas_b_857785.html[/quote]

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This is so Hypocritical that they cannot even see how stupid this makes them look. This obvious and glaring contradiction wil doom their case from the outset and if it goes to the Supreme court there's no way they'll allow the discrimination under DOMA to stand, unless for strictly partison reasons and I am not even sure the Partison Roberts Court will stoop that low.
  • metta

    Posts: 39143

    May 14, 2011 6:31 AM GMT
    Fresh Details on King & Spalding’s DOMA Withdrawal

    "the DOMA matter was not fully submitted to King & Spalding”s business review committee, a firm requirement, before Clement signed a contract obligating the firm. They said the committee immediately began reviewing the case the day after the firm learned of the contract—and rejected it the next day"


    http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2011/05/12/fresh-details-on-king-spaldings-doma-withdrawal/?mod=WSJBlog

  • metta

    Posts: 39143

    May 14, 2011 6:33 AM GMT

    DOMA Defense: Lawmakers Puzzled Where House GOP Is Getting The Money To Pay Paul Clement

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/13/doma-defense-gop-paul-clement_n_861548.html