DADT Ruled Unconstitutional - Injunction Ordered

In the real world
Sionnach Glic
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 26014
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 10:58 pm
Location: Poblacht na hÉireann, Baile Átha Cliath

DADT Ruled Unconstitutional - Injunction Ordered

Post by Sionnach Glic »

Well this is an interesting development.
RIVERSIDE, Calif. - A federal judge Tuesday ordered the government to immediately stop discharges of gay service members under the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy.

U.S. District Judge Virginia Phillips found the policy unconstitutional in September. On Tuesday, she rejected an Obama administration request to delay an injunction and ordered enforcement of the policy permanently stopped.

The Justice Department has 60 days to appeal. Legal experts say the government is under no legal obligation to do so and they could let Phillips' ruling stand.

The federal government is reviewing the ruling and has no immediate comment, said Tracy Schmaler, spokesman for the Justice Department.

Phillips declared the law unconstitutional on Sept. 9 after a two-week nonjury trial and said she would issue a nationwide injunction. But she asked first for input from Department of Justice attorneys and the Log Cabin Republicans, the gay rights group that filed the lawsuit in 2004 to stop the ban's enforcement.

The Log Cabin Republicans asked her for an immediate injunction so the policy can no longer be used against any U.S. military personnel anywhere in the world.

"The order represents a complete and total victory for the Log Cabin Republicans and reaffirms the constitutional rights of gays and lesbians in the miltiary for fighting and dying for our country," said Dan Woods, an attorney for the Log Cabin group.

Government attorneys objected, saying such an abrupt change might harm military operations in a time of war. They had asked Phillips to limit her ruling to the members of the Log Cabin Republicans, a 19,000-member group that includes current and former military service members.

The Department of Justice attorneys also said Congress should decide the issue - not her court.

Phillips disagreed, saying the law doesn't help military readiness and instead has a "direct and deleterious effect" on the armed services by hurting recruiting during wartime and requiring the discharge of service members with critical skills and training.

She said the law violates the free-speech and due process rights of service members after listening to the testimonies of military officers who have been discharged under the policy.

Legal experts say the Obama administration could choose to not appeal her ruling to end the ban - but Department of Justice attorneys are not likely to stay mum since Obama has made it clear he wants Congress to repeal the policy.

"The president has taken a very consistent position here, and that is: 'Look, I will not use my discretion in any way that will step on Congress' ability to be the sole decider about this policy here,' " said Diane H. Mazur, legal co-director of the Palm Center, a think tank at the University of California at Santa Barbara that supports a repeal.

Gay rights advocates say they worry they lost a crucial opportunity to change the law when Senate Republicans opposed the defense bill earlier this month because of a "don't ask, don't tell" repeal provision.

If Democrats lose seats in the upcoming elections, repealing the ban could prove even more difficult - if not impossible - next year.

Woods said the administration should be seizing the opportunity to let a judge do what politics has been unable to do.

The "don't ask, don't tell" policy prohibits the military from asking about the sexual orientation of service members but bans those who are gay from serving openly. Under the 1993 policy, service men and women who acknowledge being gay or are discovered engaging in homosexual activity, even in the privacy of their own homes off base, are subject to discharge.
MSNBC

So for our American members, what's the likelyhood of this being upheld or shot down?
"You've all been selected for this mission because you each have a special skill. Professor Hawking, John Leslie, Phil Neville, the Wu-Tang Clan, Usher, the Sugar Puffs Monster and Daniel Day-Lewis! Welcome to Operation MindFuck!"
Mikey
Fleet Admiral
Fleet Admiral
Posts: 35635
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 3:04 am
Commendations: The Daystrom Award
Location: down the shore, New Jersey, USA
Contact:

Re: DADT Ruled Unconstitutional - Injunction Ordered

Post by Mikey »

I'm not sure there's going to be too much effort to win it back... at least, not during the current administration. This is a win/win for Obama - he gets to tell the left that "Hey, DADT was struck down under my watch!" and he gets to tell the right that "Hey, we tried but the court made its decision."
I can't stand nothing dull
I got the high gloss luster
I'll massacre your ass as fast
as Bull offed Custer
Tyyr
3 Star Admiral
3 Star Admiral
Posts: 10654
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 10:49 pm
Location: Jeri Ryan's Dressing Room, Shhhhh

Re: DADT Ruled Unconstitutional - Injunction Ordered

Post by Tyyr »

Given that we're dealing with the UCMJ I'm not sure. However it's hard to see what the government would base its case on. I don't think the government could win this one and frankly they probably shouldn't fight it because they'll lose.
Foxfyre
Lieutenant Commander
Lieutenant Commander
Posts: 1002
Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2007 4:16 am
Location: TEXAS!!!!!!

Re: DADT Ruled Unconstitutional - Injunction Ordered

Post by Foxfyre »

Well we will see how this goes, personally I have no issues serving with a gay man or woman. Hopefully this doesn't cause future issues...
Genius insania et conseri manum
User avatar
Captain Seafort
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 15548
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Blighty

Re: DADT Ruled Unconstitutional - Injunction Ordered

Post by Captain Seafort »

Tyyr wrote:they probably shouldn't fight it because they'll lose.
In this case, that sounds like an argument to fight it.
Only two things are infinite - the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the universe: Albert Einstein.
Mark
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 17671
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 12:49 am
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii

Re: DADT Ruled Unconstitutional - Injunction Ordered

Post by Mark »

I never understood the mindset of being against the gay serving.

If a man or woman is standing at my shoulder risking their lives to help keep ME alive, do I really care who they're sleeping with? There was some bogus info and propeganda presented when I was in Basic about the gay being unreliable under fire, not being agressive enough for combat, and being liabilities after contracting dissentary (spelling?) because of constant anal sex.

What a crock.

Most gay folks I know are just as reliable as straight ones, and moreso in many situations. Plus, the days of the gay man "slapfighting" is gone. My gay friends are able to seriously kick ass. Likely from the crap they endured in younger years.
They say that in the Army,
the women are mighty fine.
They look like Phyllis Diller,
and walk like Frankenstein.
Tyyr
3 Star Admiral
3 Star Admiral
Posts: 10654
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 10:49 pm
Location: Jeri Ryan's Dressing Room, Shhhhh

Re: DADT Ruled Unconstitutional - Injunction Ordered

Post by Tyyr »

Captain Seafort wrote:
Tyyr wrote:they probably shouldn't fight it because they'll lose.
In this case, that sounds like an argument to fight it.
For Obama it's a political win as it stands right now. For those who support gays serving in the military he can claim to support it and point out that he didn't fight it. For those who don't he can say, "It's the courts, what ya gonna do?"
Foxfyre
Lieutenant Commander
Lieutenant Commander
Posts: 1002
Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2007 4:16 am
Location: TEXAS!!!!!!

Re: DADT Ruled Unconstitutional - Injunction Ordered

Post by Foxfyre »

Mark wrote:I never understood the mindset of being against the gay serving.

If a man or woman is standing at my shoulder risking their lives to help keep ME alive, do I really care who they're sleeping with? There was some bogus info and propeganda presented when I was in Basic about the gay being unreliable under fire, not being agressive enough for combat, and being liabilities after contracting dissentary (spelling?) because of constant anal sex.

What a crock.

Most gay folks I know are just as reliable as straight ones, and moreso in many situations. Plus, the days of the gay man "slapfighting" is gone. My gay friends are able to seriously kick ass. Likely from the crap they endured in younger years.
Agreed. two of my best friends are gay, and to be honest if I didn't know they were gay I would never even guess that they were. People need to get over it, I say let them in.
Genius insania et conseri manum
Mikey
Fleet Admiral
Fleet Admiral
Posts: 35635
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 3:04 am
Commendations: The Daystrom Award
Location: down the shore, New Jersey, USA
Contact:

Re: DADT Ruled Unconstitutional - Injunction Ordered

Post by Mikey »

Better a homosexual who wants to serve than a breeder who doesn't.
I can't stand nothing dull
I got the high gloss luster
I'll massacre your ass as fast
as Bull offed Custer
Sionnach Glic
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 26014
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 10:58 pm
Location: Poblacht na hÉireann, Baile Átha Cliath

Re: DADT Ruled Unconstitutional - Injunction Ordered

Post by Sionnach Glic »

Mark wrote:I never understood the mindset of being against the gay serving.

If a man or woman is standing at my shoulder risking their lives to help keep ME alive, do I really care who they're sleeping with? There was some bogus info and propeganda presented when I was in Basic about the gay being unreliable under fire, not being agressive enough for combat, and being liabilities after contracting dissentary (spelling?) because of constant anal sex.

What a crock.

Most gay folks I know are just as reliable as straight ones, and moreso in many situations. Plus, the days of the gay man "slapfighting" is gone. My gay friends are able to seriously kick ass. Likely from the crap they endured in younger years.
To be quite honest, most of the arguments I've seen for it pretty much amount to "But they'll see me naked in the showers!!!!". To which my response is if you're willing to take a bullet for your country, you should be more than capable of taking some guy checking you out.

Honestly, there's no good reason to keep homosexuals out of the military. Plenty of other countries let them in and haven't had any problems at all.
"You've all been selected for this mission because you each have a special skill. Professor Hawking, John Leslie, Phil Neville, the Wu-Tang Clan, Usher, the Sugar Puffs Monster and Daniel Day-Lewis! Welcome to Operation MindFuck!"
Mark
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 17671
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 12:49 am
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii

Re: DADT Ruled Unconstitutional - Injunction Ordered

Post by Mark »

Yes, I'm sure that every single gay in the military would be just drooling over every single naked body they see. Because, of course, gays cannot control themselves and would just reach out and touch someone, regardless of the other persons sexual orientation. :roll:
They say that in the Army,
the women are mighty fine.
They look like Phyllis Diller,
and walk like Frankenstein.
Nickswitz
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral
Posts: 6748
Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 5:34 pm
Location: Home
Contact:

Re: DADT Ruled Unconstitutional - Injunction Ordered

Post by Nickswitz »

Mark wrote:Yes, I'm sure that every single gay in the military would be just drooling over every single naked body they see. Because, of course, gays cannot control themselves and would just reach out and touch someone, regardless of the other persons sexual orientation. :roll:
You know what, some people actually think that...
:sniper: is all we can do to them.
The world ended

"Insanity -- a perfectly rational adjustment to an insane world" - R.D.Lang
User avatar
Reliant121
3 Star Admiral
3 Star Admiral
Posts: 12263
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 5:00 pm

Re: DADT Ruled Unconstitutional - Injunction Ordered

Post by Reliant121 »

Mark wrote:Yes, I'm sure that every single gay in the military would be just drooling over every single naked body they see. Because, of course, gays cannot control themselves and would just reach out and touch someone, regardless of the other persons sexual orientation. :roll:
I do it all the time at school. I just can't help but feel them ;_;




(ahem)
Foxfyre
Lieutenant Commander
Lieutenant Commander
Posts: 1002
Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2007 4:16 am
Location: TEXAS!!!!!!

Re: DADT Ruled Unconstitutional - Injunction Ordered

Post by Foxfyre »

Reliant121 wrote:
Mark wrote:Yes, I'm sure that every single gay in the military would be just drooling over every single naked body they see. Because, of course, gays cannot control themselves and would just reach out and touch someone, regardless of the other persons sexual orientation. :roll:
I do it all the time at school. I just can't help but feel them ;_;




(ahem)
huh? LOL
Genius insania et conseri manum
Vic
Lieutenant Commander
Lieutenant Commander
Posts: 1185
Joined: Thu May 28, 2009 12:20 pm
Location: Springfield MO

Re: DADT Ruled Unconstitutional - Injunction Ordered

Post by Vic »

I never had any trouble with gay individuals and never understood the whole phobia thing. I see this a akin to women in the military, our combat effectivness did not take a nosedive after accepting women. So even though gays are oversexed maniacs :roll: :? , I don't see any problems if all serving gays came out of the weapons locker.
God is great, beer is good, and people are crazy.
.................................................Billy Currington
Post Reply