Did anyone else watch Rachel Maddow's show Tuesday night when she interviewed Tobias Wolff?

[jenmito]

Here's part of the transcript that explains who he is. The subject was Obama's decision to not enforce DOMA:

MADDOW: Joining us now magic, whole satellite thing that gets us connected between Lawrence and where he is, is Tobias Wolff. He‘s law professor at the University of Pennsylvania. He‘s legal adviser and LGBT policy chair of the Obama campaign in 2008.

Mr. Wolff, thanks very much for your time. I really appreciate it.

TOBIAS WOLFF, UNIV. OF PENNSYLVANIA LAW PROFESSOR: Thank you, Rachel.

It‘s a pleasure.

MADDOW: What‘s the decision by the Justice Department mean practically in terms of gay rights? I know the law doesn‘t change right now. But what do you expect this is going to mean?

WOLFF: Well, the Justice Department and the president have done two things. The first, as you described in your intro, is about the constitutional challenges to the Defense of Marriage Act itself, and they have said that they are no longer going to defend the constitutionality of this discriminatory statute. That by itself is a big deal.

But they‘ve done something else which is arguably even more important. The president and the attorney general concluded that in a general matter, anti-gay discrimination is presumptively unconstitutional, that when states or governments pass laws or adopt policies that disadvantage gay, lesbian, and bisexual Americans, that that requires heighten or careful constitutional scrutiny but it is presumptively an unconstitutional form of discrimination.

It‘s the first time that the U.S. government has ever placed its credibility and its power behind that position. And I think it‘s going to have an impact not just on the DOMA litigation, but on civil rights litigation all around the country.

MADDOW: What does it mean that the Justice Department won‘t defend this law any more? But it‘s clear, even by the fact it is announced by a letter to Speaker Boehner, that it‘s clear that Congress has the opportunity to defend the law if it wants to. What does that mean?

WOLFF: Well—so the United States has made it clear that they‘re going to stay in this case as a party to the lawsuit. And there are provisions in the law already for Congress, the leadership in the House, for example, if they think it is a good idea, to get involved in the lawsuit perhaps to intervene as parties in the lawsuit and to mount their own defense to the lawsuit. The courts are the ones that are going to have to make a final determination about the constitutionality of this statute.

And it‘s actually, probably helpful to the courts to have arguments being made, even if they‘re bad arguments, so that the court can consider them carefully and reject them. But the practical impact of the U.S. government placing its prestige behind the proposition that gay people cannot be made second class citizens under our Constitution is difficult to overstate. I think it‘s really going to change the tenor and perhaps also the outcome of these pending lawsuits.

<snip>

the whole interview here a little more than 1/3rd down the page: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41759801/ns/msnbc_tv-rachel_maddow_show/

[AtomicKitten]

1. I did and it was a great interview!

As the LGBT policy chair for the Obama campaign, he's privy to the nuts and bolts of this issue with specific reference to the president and knows of what he speaks.

In short, it was refreshing to hear someone express thanks for the progress achieved so far.

K&R :hi:

[jenmito]

2. I'm glad you saw it...

and saw some liberals APPROVE of Obama's actions-especially someone like Tobias Wolff who knows a heck of a lot more about Obama's feelings on LGBT issues than some here who do nothing but criticize him! :hi: