You mean it’s not a “flaw”?
Via Weekly Standard:
When President Obama came out last week in favor of redefining marriage, he couched his opinion in the context of federalism, saying, “I think it is a mistake to — try to make what has traditionally been a state issue into a national issue.” During that same interview, however, he declared that a bipartisan law designed to protect states from judges who redefine marriage in other states, is “unconstitutional.” It’s very hard to square these two statements.
The Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) was passed with greater than 80 percent majorities in both the House and Senate and signed into law by President Clinton. It was designed to protect states from rogue rulings by other states’ judges, a few of whom had “found” a right to gay marriage hidden in their state constitutions. DOMA defines the use of the word “marriage” in all federal laws or regulations as referring to a union between a husband and wife, and it shields states from having to comply with other states’ — or their judges’ — contrary definitions. In other words, at least at the state level, DOMA leaves this issue up to the states.
In his interview, however, Obama said, “Well, I — you know, my Justice Department has already — said that it is not gonna defend — the Defense Against [sic] Marriage Act; that we consider that a violation of [the] equal protection clause. And I agree with them on that.” Making sure to take credit, he added, “You know? I helped to prompt that — that move on the part of the Justice Department.”