More DADT Repeal News

[jbrowder24]

A federal appeals court Wednesday issued an order blocking the U.S. military from enforcing its "don't ask, don't tell" policy on gays and lesbians serving in the military. U.S. officials have been moving ahead with dismantling the policy but had objected to having the courts force the government to officially repeal it at this time.

At issue in the complex legal fight is whether "don't ask, don't tell" can remain in effect -- even in name only -- while the legal fight over its constitutionality is being fought in the federal courts. Judges have been at odds over the enforcement issue for months.

The case puts the Obama administration in an unusual position of supporting a repeal, but at the same time filing court motions to prevent it from happening faster than planned. Military officials suggest the policy compliance changes eliminating "don't ask, don't tell" could be finished in a few weeks.

In a brief order Wednesday, the 9th U.S. Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals echoed that, saying, "the process of repealing (the policy) is well underway, and the preponderance of the armed forces are expected to have been trained by mid-summer" on abiding by the new guidelines.

"The circumstances and balance of hardships have changed," said the three-judge panel, concluding that as a result, "don't ask, don't tell" cannot remain in place.

The Justice Department can now go back to the Supreme Court to try and have the enforcement order suspended for a second time. The justices last fall upheld an earlier order keeping the policy in place.

The San Francisco-based appeals court also announced it would hear oral arguments in the issue in late August.

More here - the article was rather long to post it all:
http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/07/06/dadt.ru...?hpt=hp_t1

[rakmatis]

O.o

Thats wierd, we had a commanders call and have had to go through training courses about how its okay to be gay now and nothing can be done...

I think it might be down to squadron or group level then....

But in all honesty for almost the past year its been that the only thing they can do to you is put you on administrative hold, which basically means you dont get in any trouble but you cant get any promotions, awards, deployments, etc.

[Psyche2011]

The DoJ/Obama administration appealed and the zeroth hour, and the court reinstated it. It's really not surprising, as anyone should have expected it, but that doesn't take away the fact that this is another blow from none other than Obama. He's been dragging his feet in regards to this matter, and now he wants MORE time, going so far as to have it reinstated? We need events like these to show us the true colors of politicians.
Just remember this the next time he host an LGBT gala at $1250 a plate.

[Genersis]

The DoJ/Obama administration appealed and the zeroth hour, and the court reinstated it...

Really!:eek:
*Sigh*:frown:

[azulai]

I'm adding this article to hopefully help explain why the Obama Administration asked for DADT to be reinstated. I was initially confused and would really appreciate someone correcting me if I'm not saying this correctly.

I think the reinstatement is so that things aren't bogged down in the court system but so that the Administration can work on its repeal. Anyway, here's an article that might help.

AP News: Troops march in San Diego's Gay Pride Parade

The policy has been on and off the books as the Obama administration works to end the law while at the same time fights a court battle because of a lawsuit by the gay rights organization, the Log Cabin Republicans, which sued the Justice Department to stop the policy's enforcement immediately.

The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, in a July 6 ruling on the lawsuit, ordered the 17-year policy be immediately halted.

The Department of Justice filed an emergency motion Thursday asking the court to reconsider its order, saying ending the ban now would pre-empt the "orderly process" for rolling back the policy as outlined in the law passed and signed by the president in December.

Late Friday the court temporarily reinstated it, while prohibiting any investigation, penalties or discharges under the rule. The Pentagon said the ban could be lifted within weeks.

bolding mine

[Psyche2011]

I'm adding this article to hopefully help explain why the Obama Administration asked for DADT to be reinstated. I was initially confused and would really appreciate someone correcting me if I'm not saying this correctly.

I think the reinstatement is so that things aren't bogged down in the court system but so that the Administration can work on its repeal. Anyway, here's an article that might help.

AP News: Troops march in San Diego's Gay Pride Parade
bolding mine

So it's basically kind of like a "limbo" law; that is, it exists, but it has few options for being enforced e.g. denying gay recruits. Well, as long as those who got a little comfortable from last week's order don't end up being punished, then great. From what I can tell, the heads of the branches are expected to give their reports within the next few weeks, then the 3 signatures from the President, Secretary of Defense, and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, then 60 day waiting period, THEN it'll be gone. Apparently, DADT will die bit by bit, and not all at once. Regardless, it's quite a dizzying, frustrating, and infuriating situation.
Thanks for the additional info, azulai.

[rakmatis]

LOL the military is justt silly. To be honest I find it to be really funny.

BASICALLY youre not allowed to be gay, but if you are there is not a damn thing that cann be done to punish you.

On the flip side, marching in the parade is ok, but waving flags from your branch might actually violate some other part of the UCMJ, like a professionalism thing. I heard about a female staff sergeant who modeled for playboy in her uniform and got demoted for it, so that parts a little iffy.

as far as I know those who have come out are safe.

[fredv3b]

What I want to know is why the appeals court granted an immediate end to it's stay of the district courts order that DADT is unconstitutional and should be suspended? As I understand it the courts are usually deferential to the military and generally grant them a period of grace.

[rakmatis]

The military follows its own set of laws which are for the most part much stricter. Changing them is kindof a bitch.

[azulai]

Here's a new article about DADT and the need for the appeal by the Log Cabin Republicans to go through. I get so confused by what each side is saying. The bolding is mine and I think explains how easy it would be for DADT to be reinstated.

Gay rights group seeks court ruling to prevent return of ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’

By Associated Press, Updated: Thursday, September 1, 10:56 AM

SAN DIEGO — The military’s ban on openly gay troops will be lifted within weeks, but the policy can still be re-enacted in the future.

That’s why a Republican gay rights organization that sued the Obama administration to stop enforcement of the policy says it will ask the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals during a hearing Thursday to declare the nearly 18-year-old law unconstitutional, affirming a lower court’s ruling last year.

With several Republican presidential candidates, including Rep. Michele Bachmann, indicating they would favor reinstating the ban if elected, such a ruling is needed, said Dan Woods, the attorney for the Log Cabin Republicans. Declaring the law unconstitutional would also provide a legal path for thousands discharged under the policy to seek reinstatement, back pay or other compensation for having their careers cut short, Woods said.

“The repeal of ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ doesn’t say anything about the future,” Woods said before the hearing in Pasadena, Calif. “It doesn’t (explicitly) say homosexuals can serve. A new Congress or new president could come back and reinstitute it. We need our case to survive so there is a constraint on the government to prevent it from doing this again.”

During her campaign stop in Iowa in August, Bachmann told interviewer Candy Crowley on CNN’s “State of The Union” when asked whether she would reinstitute the law: “It worked very well and I would be in consultation with our commanders, but I think, yes, I probably would.”

Justice Department attorneys have filed a motion asking the appeals court to dismiss the case, arguing that the repeal process that will lift the ban Sept. 20 makes the lawsuit irrelevant.

Not so, says Richard Socarides, a former adviser on gay rights to Democratic former President Bill Clinton’s administration, which enacted “don’t ask, don’t tell.”

“Anyone focused on ending this policy for good should want this ruling to stand on appeal,” Socarides said Thursday. “It’s an important statement about who we are as a country and our values — values that say discrimination is unconstitutional. It’s not enough to say we repealed it. We need to declare it wrong, unconstitutional and illegal.”

The Log Cabin Republicans successfully won an injunction by U.S. District Judge Virginia Phillips last year that halted enforcement of “don’t ask, don’t tell” briefly, before the 9th Circuit reinstated it.

Justice Department attorneys say Phillips declared the law unconstitutional before the repeal process began, and that repeal of a statute invalidates such constitutional challenges.

But if the policy’s fallout is still having an impact on people’s lives then the court could still rule on the law’s constitutionality, said Erwin Chemerinsky, University of California, Irvine’s law school dean.

Nearly 14,000 military members have been discharged under the statute.

Woods said the government is trying to “remove the legal precedent established in our case so that anyone claiming back pay, reinstatement or a change in discharge status” could not take advantage of that and remedy the harm done by the unconstitutional law.

Woods submitted to the court the discharge paperwork of three service members who testified at last year’s trial. Their paperwork bears a re-entry code stating “Not Applicable” or designating the person ineligible for re-enlistment.

Two of the service members, including former Air Force Maj. Michael Almy, are part of a separate lawsuit filed against the government demanding their reinstatement. Almy, 41, said he was discharged in 2006 after a fellow officer snooped through his government computer in Iraq.

“It is mind-boggling that throughout this case, the Obama administration has said repeatedly that it favors open military service, yet it has fought us every step of the way and is now appealing the court’s judgment in our client’s favor,” Woods said. “The federal government should be working with us, not against us.”

DOJ attorneys declined to be interviewed.

In their motion, they point out that discharged gay personnel can reapply and asked that the court throw out both lawsuits, warning any ruling could disrupt the orderly repeal process that military leaders and Congress established to ensure the change does not disrupt the armed forces during wartime.

The Defense Department says it will waive no re-entry codes for those with honorable discharges made under the policy, and they will be treated like other prior service members who are accepted based on need. All military branches are at full capacity and plan to reduce their forces.

“In keeping with long-standing traditions of deference to the judgments of military leaders concerning military matters, specific re-accession decisions — which individuals should be selected to serve in what capacities in our nation’s military — should be made by military leaders, rather than this court,” government attorneys said in their motion.