Kane Won't Defend Pa.'s Ban on Gay Marriage

, The Legal Intelligencer


Pennsylvania Attorney General Kathleen Kane announced Thursday that she will not defend the state's ban on gay marriage after the American Civil Liberties Union filed a suit Tuesday challenging the law.

This content has been archived. It is available exclusively through our partner LexisNexis®.

To view this content, please continue to Lexis Advance®.

Continue to Lexis Advance®

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber? Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via Lexis Advance®. This includes content from the National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.

ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at customercare@alm.com

What's being said

  • not available

    When Ms Spencer first broke this story re Kane I sent her a msg which she has chosen to totally ignore and not respond to, so I will say again. Atty Gen Kane is I believe in direct violation of her oath of office and besides which she was personally named in the ACLU suit. As the Atty Gen of PA, Kane cannot pick & choose what she either will or will not prosecute or defend. It is one thing to say I don't like this law and will work to have changed by those who passed it (the legislature) but I will uphold the responsibility to do my job, It is another to say, "I don't like this law, I won't represent the people who elected me, let the governor defend it...." I guess coming from NEPA where politics is defined as graft & corruption on the elected scale, Kane is simply playing politics. Principle & ethics? Let Kane take a lesson from the Elliot Richardson playbook on "Principles & Ethics" LET HER RESIGN or better yet let her be impeached.

  • Ratkellar

    While Kane's views on *why*the statute is unconstitutional might be interesting, there is no substance to this article.
    Opinions can and do vary, but it is still surprising how often 200 years of Constitutionality is being challenged in courts on an issue regarding the very fabric of society. One, I see no basis for marriage to be a constitutional issue. Two, a democratic republic is not to be run by the judicial branch. Three, it is not a court's prerogative to determine status issues like this.
    It is also amusing to read an article about a "crowd of dozens."

  • citizen Joe

    Direct refusal to attend to official duties and direct violation of a legal oath of office, if principle is a matter here let her resign or have a an assistant deputy jr intern awaiting entrance to law school represent her office in court, of course there is also impeachment for misfeasance & malfeasance in direct violation of the office to which elected...

  • MJC

    Doesn't Kane have an ethical obligation to vigorously represent her client, ie: the Commonwealth, and, so, it's laws...?

Comments are not moderated. To report offensive comments, click here.

Preparing comment abuse report for Article #1202610515104

Thank you!

This article's comments will be reviewed.