This week we’re talking DADT, but the dynamic is the same for marriage. The public, the culture, has come to broadly accept lesbians and gays serving openly in the military; we support recognition and benefits for committed same-sex couples. Conservatives know this. So best to keep it from coming to pass through the legislature.
The White House strategy on repealing DADT was premised on minimizing the potential for a backlash by appeasing all the essential stakeholders—Congress, the military, and activists committed to repealing the policy. But by blocking repeal and allowing a judge to declare the policy unconstitutional, Republicans could sidestep the argument over an unpopular policy by turning it into one about unelected judges imposing their will on the electorate.
That strategy may seem cynical, but it ultimately fits the die-hard opposition strategy Republicans have deployed for the past two years. If DADT repeal is inevitable, they might as well make sure it occurs on terms most favorable to them—and that means being able to argue about the tyranny of activist judges, rather than the straightforward injustice of preventing patriots from serving openly simply because of who they are.
My question is will voter anger manifest itself as support for the courts over a do-nothing congress and trump conservative cries about activist judges?
Via.