Rick Xiao is a California attorney and a site collaborator. I wish to thank Rick for alerting me to the motion.
See my earlier post on why Karen Golinski, a 9th Circuit staff attorney, has sued the Office of Personnel Management. Lambda Legal attorney Jennifer Pizer represents Golinksi.
Rick makes the following comment:
It's interesting to note that Golinski's motion has mentioned DOMA only in the context of quoting Judge Kozinski's prior orders. In other words, Golinski does not directly attack DOMA as part of her case in chief. But OPM has repeatedly invoked DOMA as the legal justification for its refusal to enroll Golinski's spouse in the federal health insurance plan, and will surely do so in this case. Therefore, Golinski has left this central issue for OPM to raise in its defense. This strategy is narrowly tailored to secure OPM's compliance with Judge Kozinski's orders and shifts the burden of proof to OPM if it asserts DOMA as a defense. Perhaps more importantly, it sidesteps certain broad arguments -- such as state rights and federal recognition of gay marriage -- that are suitable in Massachusetts but not in California due to Prop. 8.