Clement Quits Law Firm After It Exits DOMA Defense

It's been a big news morning today. First, responding to online pressure from Human Rights Campaign and Change.org, Paul Clement's law firm of King & Spalding announced that they had filed a motion to remove the firm from representing the Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group of the U.S. House of Representative in its defense of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) in federal court.

The firm's statement:

Today the firm filed a motion to withdraw from its engagement to represent the Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group of the House of Representatives on the constitutional issues regarding Section III of the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act. Last week we worked diligently through the process required for withdrawal.

In reviewing this assignment further, I determined that the process used for vetting this engagement was inadequate. Ultimately I am responsible for any mistakes that occurred and apologize for the challenges this may have created.

In response to his firm's decision to refuse to sign on to a legal defense which per force requires them to argue that discrimination against same-sex couples is constitutional, Paul Clement (who was reportedly paid $5 million a year by King & Spalding) resigned from the firm and joined another:

"I resign out of the firmly held belief that a representation should not be abandoned because the client's legal position is extremely unpopular in certain quarters. Defending unpopular clients is what lawyers do," Clement wrote to King & Spalding chairman Robert Hays. "I recognized from the outset that this statute implicates very sensitive issues that prompt strong views on both sides. But having undertaken the representation, I believe there is no honorable course for me but to complete it." 

Clement said he will join Bancroft PLLC, a small Washington-based firm that is home to former Bush Justice Department official Viet Dinh.

The full text of Clement's resignation letter is also available. This is probably good news for the likelihood of DOMA not surviving judicial review since Clement will be forced to defend the discriminatory law without drawing upon the resources of a huge law firm like King & Spalding.

It should be noted that the pressure to get Clement's former law firm does not violate the principle that all defendants have a right to legal representation, like the Los Angeles Times editorial board foolishly claimed. DOMA is not a person, it does not have any Miranda rights; this is not a criminal case, it is a civil case. The contract that BLAG had signed with King & Spalding prohibited all members of the firm from expressing opposition to DOMA or advocating for the repeal of the law.