. >> the marriage amendments are quite different from doma. supreme court explicitly didn't decide it at the same time. can we talk about attorney holder's role? for the first year and a half in his tenure he defended doma. that tells me as a lawyer he believed there was some basis, rational basis to defend the law, to ethicily go into court and do it. he obviously believed that he did. then when the flip happened -- he backed out of the defense of doma, presumably with the request of the president who, mind you, supported same-sex marriage when running for president. i'm not quite sure where it became obviously unconstitutional. as an attorney general, not merely a lawyer, he somehow felt that there was no basis all of a sudden to defend that which he had a basis. >> i'm going to shock you. we actually agree on something. you shocked us last time. i'm going to shock you this time. you are in the same situation that the attorney general is talking about. there was a law that you couldn't defend but you also made sure someone else did. i think

the scathing dissent mocked the majority opinion which specified while the court was striking down doma, its ruling did not apply to state gay marriage bans. in a 26-page rant, scalia took a knife to that logic even writing a fake ruling showing how easily the majority opinion would be used to strike down bans across the country. >> in his dissent, he takes part of the majority opinion, says, hey, guys, this is how you take the majority opinion, cross out a few words and what you end up with is an identical argument to strike down every ban of marriage equality across the nation. at the time, some noted how scalia's dissent could be used to further the cause of gay rights. >> he says it's only a pretense that today's prohibition of laws excluding same-sex marriage is confined to the federal government. he says the other shoe will drop about stay laws banning same-sex marriage, quote, later, comma, maybe next term. you think he's right? >> yes, we now know scalia was right and he was so right that his vitriolic dissent has now been used by five federal judges to expand gay rights. in vir

al doma toes get in there. rand pauls get in there. >> charlie, adam made a good point. a lot of these are price guarantees. guaranteed profits for a lot of the industry. no matter what your fears are, we will guarantee a profit for you. if they all had the same guarantee -- >> it's all about lobbying and the impact of lobbying. it gets down to the voter. the voters keep putting it in. >> where's -- i don't know. where is ailalfalfa, by the way? >> farmers go back and say look what we got. >> you say it's going get worse. >> we'll be doing this segment every year. >> i want to thank you both. up next, another up and down week for stocks. people are veryconfused. how about green no matter which >>> all right. stocks that pay you no matter what. >> you can make money on the dividends and i think the stock goes higher as well. >> adam, what do you think of that? >> perfectly good picked great company, but, you know, very risky because it's depending on the gloel economic recovery, competition. there's a lost risks with boeing. >> what are you doings these days, adam. >> sdy

you know, doma was duly enacted by congress, and signed by bill clinton. and this is a problem that congress is facing, i'll be testifying tomorrow at the same hearing as the congressman, and this is one of the issues we're going to have too deal with it. it is a serious problem, i alone can defend statutes as the representative of the united states. and then he's just not there to do it. >> i declare that this statute is indefensible and i don't care what the people of my state have said. in many of these states, the attorney general is of a different party than the sitting governor, you can see politics may find their way into it. we look forward to hearing your testimony tomorrow. >> thanks. >> all the best. >> he is going to testify on capitol hill about these power grabs, we've been watching at an executive level. the president's use of executive orders and executive action has caused a lot of consternation in the country. tim rice is a republican out of south carolina and author of a resolution titled, stop this overreaching presidency. he's being ca

so many declared this should be a town where same sex marriage should continue now with prop 8 and doma we don't only celebrate this but when 289 percent of our homeless are lgbt are background we've got to do something about that. i really appreciate it it when devon got developed involved and lgbt x connect and made it at that lgbt center we're going to respond to that. san francisco has always been there for people pea this is what our government will continue to do. we'll invite people to celebrate the diversity and we'll like this fire engine we'll come to the rescue of those in need (clapping.) (laughter.) >> this is the spirit of our city and i want to make sure as long as i've got the privilege of being the mayor we'll continue this tribute and understanding the history and working together collaborating finding solutions to people's problems and especially during the holidays making sure we talk to another person who got it a little bit better than us come in and help identify city succeed for everybody yes support the season of giving and the nonprofit organizations in our com

al doma toes get in there. rand pauls get in there. >> charlie, adam made a good point.f these are price guarantees. guaranteed profits for a lot of the industry. no matter what your fears are, we will guarantee a profit for you. if they all had the same guarantee -- >> it's all about lobbying and the impact of lobbying. it gets down to the voter. the voters keep putting it in. >> where's -- i don't know. where is ailalfalfa, by the way? >> farmers go back and say look what we got. >> you say it's going get worse. >> we'll be doing this segment every year. >> i want to thank you both. up next, another up and down week for stocks. people are very confused. how about green no matter which way the market goes. let's do this. [ male announcer ] at his current pace, bob will retire when he's 153, which would be fine if bob were a vampire. but he's not. ♪ he's an architect with two kids and a mortgage. luckily, he found someone who gave him a fresh perspective on his portfolio. and with some planning and effort, hopefully bob can retire at a more appropriate age. it's notocket

they held intact doma and said states have the predominant role in defining marriage and the federal government needs to follow that. this is a state's right issue. what happened in virginia and these other states are travesties of democracy overstepping the bounds of the federal government. we have millions of people who clearly voted to define marriage in their state by their sovereign right as one man and one woman. as a result of these decisions their democratic rights has been nullified. >> the judges ruling in these state cases simply misunderstand what the supreme court said last june? >> i think yesterday's decision from judge ray allen is one that strikes at the heart of what americans believe about marriage, which is that marriage is a fundamental right, and lgbt people should have access to that fundamental right because the u.s. institution guarantees protection of the law. i think it's interesting that it's a misreading of the supreme court, when section two of the defense of marriage act was not in front of the court. it was only whether or not section a. >> they have t

al doma toes get in there. rand pauls get in there. >> charlie, adam made a good point.eed profits for a lot of the industry. no matter what your fears are, we will guarantee a profit for you. if they all had the same arantee -- >> it's all about lobbying and the impact of lobbying. it gets down to the voter. thevoters keep putting it in. >> where's -- i don't know. where is ailalfalfa, by the way? >> farmers go back and say look what we got. >> you say it's going get worse. >> we'll be doing this segment every year. >> i want to thank you both. up next, another up and down week for stocks. people are very confused. how about green no matter which welcome back. how is everything? there's nothing like being your own boss! and my customers are really liking your flat rate shipping. fedex one rate. really makes my life easier. maybe a promotion is in order. good news. i got a new title. and a raise? management couldn't make that happen. [ male announc ] introducing fedex one rate. simple, flat rate shipping with the reliability of fedex. i ke prilosec otc each morni for my

. >> because of the damage we doma we doma to the ecosystemto the eco to the eco >> no, 'm talking a'mb extinctions. >> because of meteorites and all th >> and a species really -- the best we can tell, a we can te s on ave abos a ave abos ve ye so we havesoundredsoun thousand years left but y and even the we hevenisheass tinction events so most lifents so mfents so m is extinct that's ever lived on this plane thisthisthis >> but mainly thro butthose --ro be -- b e mostly throue mostirst five extinction nts which onreonre l ca l ca l cal wha's called 's called 's called exticallon whi exti of courseausean mause. an m. an m >> s 's slate'heoryla about the meteorites and thend t extinction of e dinosaurs? >> hold that >> hol [laughter] au ve come a little bit you know? ad a couple adates wple i -- >> he was that owa o o o asteroids to o asteroidteid dinos. he's never forgiven unever that. ter] >> w ore pluralisti uralisti >> anythin dr >>ic happen? >>ic happe >> well, i t>> w evidence is -- would stil stil il with wiues, i'm convince he neo- e that theat theat the eviden thepretty str the

>> i think the fact that doma went down in the supreme court.nality of gay marriage was not decided on is what gives oxygen to these movements. and there's still political momentum to be created by coming out against the lifestyles of homosexuality in certain quarters of america. and arizona is one of them. >> the family, the group that's very shadowed. the people don't know who's in it. how influential are they even in the u.s.? >> clearly very influential. you said in the open there, former senators are a part of it. so they are a group to be reckoned with, that's for sure. >> and the last question, going quickly back to uganda is there a movement outside of this country that's pushing back against this kind of homophobia being codified into law? are we seeing a pushback in uganda against these laws on the ground? >> absolutely. the uganda social justice community is growing. it's small but it's getting watch groups like international amnesty ty and campaigns. americans are getting out there and doing better work against these laws. >> thank y

a political decision to go after eric holder today and made a political decision to keep defending doma listening to what he actually said. which is respect the constitution and do this in a very rare instance. >> that's rich coming from an administration that violates the constitution every chance it gets. it's the only -- >> it doesn't violate the constitution. [speaking at the same time] >> lets base the conversation in fact. >> the federal government ex-tease its powers on so many levels the executive branch and the president and attorney general holder -- >> according to you but not according to law. but according to the law they don't. >> let's not get in to a debate about the executive oughts and all of this right now let's stay on topic. we are seeing in arizona, kansas bills that may or may not make their way through the legislatures or signed by the governors enshrining rights to discriminate against gaze. >> these are religious freedom rest raise act passed unanimously in congress . >> they go further never allowing businesses n to not provide services to game couples and so

asemt,f u n g atig, it inowoin da anythi ee atouo, clinnevain, llot veucimct ithsa lsoinotof our key domaswn u lln gornment, dohesathk you mr gas? e eynxuso arro yo u e lkg oua ogm atill afctheir cizs iner ohethprra that are oppornieso ft them into the dd css >> he enerimesd thovnmt leaders d thr llgns to sit dn d arbo oerouri sil suaons th a inbeerhath a dog. eyreetting vacneouor ruing thprary healthar st. t fm ct imo odtive. inab tgethr arnd veeah d rilture a lileorprri, ats benefici. etop ia sehe the evusater d n tsts. ear d t usus said,ominndelp us deneowgrulreet done. hednef e p op omheouatn. weavhithreurces. attaedive yes o and nothe paff incdie. thnepre niers cayi tt ia eawa ifhefe le u wille thhefothlo r, d yoarnotrngo t pho a y he pes the ndofroem tn yocageth tpa atntn. i vy ppwi t ceioth wge ev opoo,he i am llg a tseeoe d sangthey he dmo, th he me rehi haen th te e ll dyogeanpuba? pplwa tsh tt they n tngabt li iimrtt sw at esdias c bcouered. t loofolrsane enon wlean of dias tt e vi rrleffts >>nftis see mite in the hltpiur ashegerierth g obit >>oteaasuc >> ithri cntesis ardias cce

. >> i think it's the right move, especially since they cut down that one section of doma. >> reporter comes on heels of the supreme court ruling against the defense of marriage act and this married couple says it's encouraging for married gay friends outside of california. >> they live in virginia, for example, where gay marriage is outlawed specifically and this will provide a protection from the federal government for their relationship in the way that they didn't have before. it's very important. >> reporter: attorney general holder plans to put out the memo on monday ordering the rest of the criminal justice system to institute these changes. john sasaki, ktvu channel 2 news. >>> more details, tony perkins president of the conservative family research council issue a state sharply critical of the decision. perkins said, "news that the justice department will extend sweeping recognition to marriages of same-sex couples is yet another illustration of the lawlessness of this administration." >>> california's health insurance exchange pulled it's on-line dr. directory, reporting that

thing is going on here, i think, when it comes to ted cruz banging around here on trying to revive domaich the supreme court was pretty clear is unconstitutional. >> it seems to me that at some point putting your name on pieces of paper, pieces of legislation like this, will come back to haunt you. not you, but ted cruz. i'm talking to you. >> right. >> nowhere is that shame going to be more pronounced than the state of kansas, which is trying to pass a law that would bar punishment when individuals, groups, and businesses cite religious beliefs in refusing to recognize a marriage or civil union or providing goods and services or employments to a couple. if you substituted sexual orientation to skin color, these would be jim crow laws. >> it is beyond me. as a piece in "slate" pointed out, this is much broader than just refusing service to same sex couple. it could boil down to refusing services to a gay person. i don't see how in kansas that's going to be allowed to stand. the senate president made it clear that this isn't going to come up for a vote or at least the senate president di

this is just the jacket on jamie from doma, $598. our total look for everything, $180.63.>> i'm encouraging people. if you're going to buy a new spring jacket, don't opt for black. opt for a color. make it pop. >> really? >> the tee is cotton, $7.98 from kmart. the floral skirt, isn't breaking news, floral is in for spring. but more with a pop of color in the floral this year and shoes are $59.95 from shoe dazzle. the total -- >> what is it? >> $183.63 for the total. >> last we have ila fisher. >> my favorite movie, "great gatsby ," "wedding crashers," our total look $216.79. >> the shoes look just like -- those are amazing. >> those are from marshall's, $49.99. >> really? the top. >> the other thing -- the top is great. $16.80 from kohl's. if you're looking for a skirt, a mini skirt that flares out this is a splurge item from american apparel, $150. they have less expensive versions, but we want to show you whatever your budget is -- >> it is all possible. >> i like it. thank you, jill. excellent, girl. >> we're getting our mardi gras party started early with the king of

they've chosen not to enforce doma. they've created waivers for obamacare.es. it's a slippery slope when the lawyer for a government chooses when and how they're going to enforce the law. >> very interestingly, and you make a very good point. so attorney general holder says to you, if you don't agree with the law on the books regarding gay marriage, then don't enforce it. does he feel the same way about the immigration laws and the marijuana laws, frankly? does he also say you should have that discretion as well? one person in the state. >> well, i'm a criminal prosecutor. when you look at the adversarial system we have in our criminal justice system, you have to have an advocacy on both sides. criminal defense attorneys don't support crime, but they represent the interest of their client. when you're suing someone because you feel like you've been harmed by them, you know, you're not supporting -- when someone is defending them, you're not supporting the harm. you're supporting the adversarial process. if the state attorney general doesn't stand up for the

now, that then was somewhat upheld by the sprk when they invalidated doma last june. so now -- and as we all know, justice scalia in his dissent said, oh, great, look what you have done now. you've basically given states the ability to opt them out, and that's exactly what's happening they're taking the sort of facetious remark in court papers and saying, you know what? he's actually right. and what the attorney general has said in that speech, you really have to read to find the wink wink and nod nod in there, but he's bakley saying, hey, if you think that heightened scrutiny applies to the laws in your state, go right ahead. other states have done it, we did it, and we won. >> you know, speaking of the supreme court, josh, before we wrap this up, the supreme court is expected to decide next month whether companies like hobby lobby have to provide coverage if a private business has a religious or moral objection to it. that fits into this context insofar as we're talking about the concept of corporate personhood, and they should be entitled to the same -- that plays

if you take a look the his refusal to enforce doma.riting the immigration law by putting in the dream act. rewriting the clean air act by allowing the epa to regulate co2. that's in the supreme court now because that wasn't in the law. of course last week for the 27th time, rewriting the affordable care act which said the law shall apply months after december 31st, 2013. that's now. he's put it off to 2015 and now 2016. so there's a real congressional crisis. richard nixon's not nothing on this guy. >> we could debate the previous orders. we had previous presidents that brought in people to tell them that waterboarding was torture. they justified violating the geneva convention and the coast military justice and the u.n. convention on torture. we could debate which is the better executive orders that were issued. >> no. and that was a real debate there when bush was doing that. >> yes, it was. >> right. >> there's a real criticism of that. there was real criticism of gitmo. but when this president uses unmanned aerial drones to target

it began in our case when the president decided in a historic decision that doma was unconstitutionalnd they weren't going to defend the statute. it's the one time in the case where i was incredibly surprised. i had tears running down my face when that happened and everything has led from that. >> speaking of your personal reactions, when you saw the news out of arizona, at the opposite end of spectrum, a good conversation between the legislature and courts, it seems like some of these legislatures are out of touch with what the courts are ruling, arizona obviously a striking example although it didn't go through ultimately. what was your personal reaction when you and your partner saw that news? >> when the bill was passed obviously it was very distressing to any gay person in the united states. the bill which was passed which will not go into law is no different than bills that allowed restaurants not to serve african-americans or hotels not to accept jews as guests. it was no different than that and thank god the governor and people of arizona have seen to do the right thing and em

it's arguable that after doma passed perhaps a challenge will show that, yes, these people are protectednd should be protected. but right now it's almost open season on those people. and it's just unbelievable to me. and let's face it. this is code for discrimination against gay, lesbian and transgender. >> by implication, that's what it means. >> you can walk in and they can say, no, i'm not going to serve you and you can't file a lawsuit against them. they say no, i'm protected under my religious beliefs. >> therein lies the problem. if you peel this back and look at the amendments in general, right? none of the amendments are absolute. if you look at the first amendment, right? you have the freedom of speech. of course, you do. but you can't defame someone. you can't yell "fire" in the theater, right? you have the right to bear arms, but it doesn't mean that we all walk around with submachine guns. so why am i saying that? because it speaks to the larger issue. yes, we have freedom of religion. what does that mean? should freedom of religion be viewed in the context of if it doesn't c

latest evidence of a recent wave building in this country for gay rights, a wave that started with doma and the supreme court last year, then made its way to kansas and arizona, one that can be seen today in kentucky and texas, and has some on the right crying ironically discrimination. last night jan brewer vetoed sb 1062. she took her time, didn't take any questions, but did finally brings the ax down it was difficult to find anyone in either political party, who didn't think that that was the right decision. mitt romney, both gop senators, businesses like apple, delta and american airlines, all came down on the side of a veto. of course in politics like life, you can't please all the people all the time. >> unfortunately, though, this is how fundamental freedoms are trampled. you create a stampede by spooking politician in the public with misinformation. but when the dust settles and the hired guns go away, the people will realize they were hoodwinked. >> this fight wasn't just about arizona. the swell has become a litmus test, and it's not hard to see why. the fate of a lot of simil

the seventh time a judge ruled against a ban on same-sex marriage since the supreme court overturned domar. joining me from austin is the texas co-chair for freedom to marry, mark. let's get to the breaking news. in your state of texas. another state, another judge takes up this issue and errs on the side of equality. what do you make of in news out of texas? >> well, it's great. we just announced yesterday the southern campaign for the freedom to marry. i'm delighted that one day later we've got this great news out of texas. as you've mentioned, this is the seventh federal judge in a row to rule against state laws prohibiting gay marriage. the arc of history on this is bending forward. it's not going to reverse itself. we're going to have hiccups along the way like we have in arizona right now. given all that i've heard about the arizona case, as you've mentioned in your piece, even some of the legislators who voted for it didn't understand it when they voted on it. and i'm very happy to see the huge corporate and general response from not only companies but republican politicians, inclu

coming up, this week may have been the biggest week for gay rights since the supreme court decided doma in june. how can the lgbt community seize on the momentum? we're going to have the president of g.l.a.d. later this hour. ♪ humans -- we are beautifully imperfect creatures, living in an imperfect world. that's why liberty mutual insurance has your back, offering exclusive products like optional better car replacement, where, if your car is totaled, we give you the money to buy one a model year newer. call... and ask an insurance expert about all our benefits today, like our 24/7 support and service, because at liberty mutual insurance, we believe our customers do their best out there in the world, so we do everything we can to be there for them when they need us. plus, you could save hundreds when you switch -- up to $423. call... today. liberty mutual insurance. responsibility. what's your policy? then don't miss sleep train's wbest rest event.st ever? you'll find sleep train's very best mattresses at the guaranteed lowest price. plus, pay no interest for 3 years on beautyrest black

women's issues, whether they be health or pay, equal pay issues, gay rights issues and getting rid of domat ask don't tell. he's gone out of his way to make sure that he kind of engages with particular communities to say, i understand you. i feel your pain. and i want to help you. and i think that now -- but there may have been some aversion to doing that in the race question because it's already complicated with his presidency. but now i think that it's getting to a point where he feels so stymied on other bigger issues that he cannot get around to things that -- >> reverend johnson, you wrote an op ed last year where you said president obama was a president for everyone except black people. do his actions today in your opinion change certainly how you feel? >> well, i've always loved the president. i think he's doing an outstanding job. and even today when i looked at the fact that he had those persons of color around him, the young men and the fact that he has begun this initiative, it says to me that the president really not only cares about these young men but he cares about america.

as i said just after the administration's decision on doma was announced, america's most treasured ideals were not put into action or given the full force of law in a single instant. on the contrary, our ideals are continually advanced as our justice systems, and our union, are strengthened. and as social science, human experience, legislation, and judicial decisions expand the circle of those who are entitled to the protections and rights enumerated by the constitution. as we gather here in washington today, i believe that our highest ideals, realized in the form of landmark supreme court rulings, from brown to zablocki, from romer to lawrence, from loving to windsor, light a clear path forward. they have impelled us, in some instances, to extraordinary action. and the progress we've seen has been consistent with the finest traditions of our legal system, the central tenets of our constitution, and the fundamental truth that, as president obama once said, when all americans are treated as equal. we are all more free. as we come together this week to renew our commitment to the work we sh

you have ted cruz and mike lee introducing a bill last week that would effectively reinstitute doma atel. that seems to be almost directly from that memo, here are people who are upset about the changing america and doing everything they can to stop it. >> you know, i'm so glad you read that. that is my favorite piece of research in the last 12 months. it's fascinating. that poll has these word clouds in it and it shows how do you feel right now? when they talk to people particularly in the farthest right reaches of the republican base, the words are things like scared, angry, and i think that what that's getting at is this sort of sense of loss of position, that if you're in your sixty, mid to late 60s right now, the world you grew up in is completely different. the status of women from your mother to your wife to your daughter completely different. and the sense that your status is different is sort of palpable to a lot of people. it's certainly not everybody. but when you're talking act elections, you're talking about the most active people and trying to get the people you can get t

the windsor decision came down last year has used it in a way that the federal government did when doma was enacted. you will see the supreme court condemned congress for putting its thumb on the scales and influencing how states would choose to conduct their own marriage policy. and now we see the federal government since the enactment of the windsor decision enacting through soft law at various administrative levels what we call a place of celebration rule with regard to marriages, saying that if you have a marg license -- marriage license from one jurisdiction, we will honor it in every jurisdiction, including ones that don't recognize same-sex marriage. so if congress put its thumb not to enact same sex marriage and now they are using this opinion to coerce states to enact same sex marriage or what the supreme court called two regime of marriage laws in any given state. so for example if you have a state that does not honor same sex marriage like missouri, but are from new york, they will receive federal benefits but not state benefits. and this has implications for religious libert

they decided on doma instead, which is a big ruling as well.t take -- we were talking about it before we came on air here. but it seems you're trying to force the supreme court's hand in some way. >> i wouldn't say force their hand. the time is overdue. it's time to end this discrimination. what we are trying to do is create the climate that says to the justices -- >> get their attention. >> this is the time. it's time to get america on the right side of history. couples like these plaintiffs shouldn't have to wait another day, another year. we shouldn't have to battle couple by couple, court by court, case by case to have the constitution's command of equality that they did recognize in the federal case last year respected across the country. >> evan wilson, freedom to marry, like you said, that momentum certainly been going a certain way. thank you so much. see you again. >>> a quick look at the other stories making news right now. workers at the volkswagen manufacturing plant in tennessee voted not to joint the united auto workers on friday.

one of the projects you helped move forward in the past year is the doma restoration project that isng done for the -- the dome restoration project that is being done on the capito l. this is a $60 million restoration project on the capitol dome. you took a tour before moving ahead for the appropriations on this. guest: i am on the legislative branch, i am the ranking member. we have to make sure that the capitol building and the other facilities are well-maintained. is -- it has something like 1300 cracks. it had some real issues in terms of maintenance. dome is a symbol of our country and freedom. we had to make sure that it is repaired great it is a $60 million project and we worked to find that money in the budget. facte cognizant of the that we have to find savings and reforms to reduce spending. we are working to do that in the federal budget. the people ofme, this country would want to make sure that we do the necessary maintenance on the dome. project andur-year people will start to see scaffolding goal up around the about four will take years. we're going to make sure that i

. >> if we have a federal administration, which ignores the expres will of the deem in doma and whennd then you get judges to overturn it. >> this is a scare tactic. give me this first proposition. in arizona you don't know any of cases of businesses that were forced to do things that violated their religious beliefs with gay people, right? >> do you know of any examples with the gays or the ones claiming about this? where are the examples of gays being discriminated. >> that's not what the law did. let's not be tricky because you have straight issues to debate here but this isn't one of them. there is no case, the governor said it the proponents couldn't up come with one and the law in arizona does not give special protection to members of the community. you didn't need the law. >> can we agree on this? we have religious rights and a collision with gay rights. we need to protect both. it's not an easy delicate balance. but my rights of freedom of religion are in the first amendment to the united states constitution. >> yes, they are. >> when should they take a state? this law in ari

i think it's the right move especially since they cut down that one section of doma. >> it comes on theurt ruling against the defense of marriage act. this married couple said it's encouraging for married gay friends outside of california. >> they live in virginia, for example, which where gay marriage is outlawed specifically, and so this will provide a protection from the federal government for their relationship in a way that they didn't have before. it's very important. >> attorney general holder plans to put out a memo on monday ordering the rest of the justice system to institute these changes. >>> the president of the conservative family research council issued a statement criticizing the new policy, tony perkins said "the news that the justice department will extend sweeping recognition to marriages of same sex couples is yet another illustration of the lawlessness of this administration." >>> chevy is showing its support for gay marriage through two new ads. >> and while what it means to be a family hasn't changed what a family looks like has. >> the automaker featured gay coup

court making yet another mistake, the federal definition of marriage and the defense of marriage act, doma, was ruled unconstitutional in the united states vs. windsor case. and as a result of the vagueness contained in that decision, federal agencies began developing interagency guidance that surpasses the limits set by our very own constitution. set by the supreme court. set by congress. while some of those agencies are referring to state law, mr. speaker, in determining a couple's marital status based on calledhe couple resides, the state of domicile, others are using the state of celebration or where a couple is married when they enforce federal laws. this latter practice is unconstitutional. agencies do not have the authority to create law and therefore agencies which are following, quote, the state of celebration, end quote, in determining the recognition of marriage, they undercut state laws and inherently influence the debate within the borders of those states. that's why i have introduced the state marriage defense act this act solves that problem. it provides that a marriage will