The King & Spalding Skedaddle

by Matthew J. Franck

Today at Public Discourse, I argue that the decision of King & Spalding to bug out on defending DOMA, and the stick-to-itiveness of Paul Clement, show us more than a simple tale of cowardice and courage.  The real villain of the piece is the same-sex marriage movement, which now routinely engages in intimidation in place of arguments, and blithely attacks the integrity of American institutions.  A sample:

[T]he King & Spalding skedaddle is more than an unseemly ditching of a client in order to escape the heat of political pressure. It is a blow to the institutional integrity of the legal system, and this would be true even if the abandoned party were not the United States itself. The firm will rightly suffer in reputational terms, but is no doubt big and established enough to survive the self-inflicted wound.

But what is behind this unexpected caving of such a large and well-esteemed law firm? If King & Spalding’s leaders exhibited cowardice and a failure of integrity, it is worth our noticing that they were bullied into it by the organized enemies of DOMA, led by the euphemistically named Human Rights Campaign (HRC). It is increasingly clear that the movement for same-sex marriage has no regard for the ethical norms of institutional integrity that ordinarily govern the processes of republican self-government in the United States.

You can read the whole thing here.

Bench Memos

NRO’s home for judicial news and analysis.