Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

21 Senators to Attn. General: Don't Appeal DADT Ruling

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
t0dd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-13-10 03:38 PM
Original message
21 Senators to Attn. General: Don't Appeal DADT Ruling
Source: SheWired

A total of 21 U.S. senators have signed on a to letter urging Atty. Gen. Eric Holder not to appeal last month’s ruling by Judge Virginia Phillips that found “don’t ask, don’t tell” to be unconstitutional. Phillips ordered Tuesday afternoon that all discharges under the policy be halted, and by early evening the Department of Justice had given no indication whether it would seek to stay the injunction on discharges.

Senators Mark Udall of Colorado and Kirsten Gillibrand of New York led the effort to circulate the letter, which they originally sent to Holder last month.

“In light of important national security concerns, we respectfully request that you, in your capacity at the Department of Justice, refrain from appealing this decision or the permanent injunction granted against this law,” the senators wrote to Holder.

...

Udall and Gillibrand originally sent the letter to Holder in September. They are now joined by Senators John Kerry (D-Mass.), Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), Roland Burris (D-I;;.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Mary Landrieu (D-La.), Bernard Sanders (I-Vt.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Tim Johnson (D-S.D.), Al Franken (D-Minn.), Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), Russ Feingold (D-Wis.), Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.), Richard Durbin (D-Ill.), Bob Menendez (D-N.J.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Barbara Mikulski (D-Md.), Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), and Ben Cardin (D-Md.). The additional signatures are a testament to the support in the U.S. Senate for repeal of “don’t ask, don’t tell.”

Dear Mr. Attorney General,

We are writing to bring to your attention the recently issued decision of Judge Virginia A. Phillips of the United States District Court of the Central District of California in Log Cabin Republicans v. United States, which declared that the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (DADT) underlying law violates the U.S. Constitution’s guarantees of due process and free speech, thereby rendering DADT unconstitutional. In light of important national security concerns, we respectfully request that you, in your capacity at the Department of Justice, refrain from appealing this decision or the permanent injunction granted against this law.

The following quote from the judge’s decision captures the overwhelming reason why the decision should stand: “Among those discharged were many with critically needed skills … Far from furthering the military's readiness, the discharge of these service men and women had a direct and deleterious effect on this governmental interest.” As one of many criteria that the Justice Department will examine in deciding whether to appeal the permanent injunction to this policy, we ask that you examine whether or not an appeal furthers a legitimate governmental interest. We would say any appeal does not.

Additionally, DADT harms military readiness, as well as the morale and the cohesiveness of our armed forces, at a time when our military’s resources are strained and unity is critically important. For every person discharged after ten years of service, six new servicemembers would need to be recruited to recover the level of experience lost by that discharge. This not only weakens our military, but neither is it an effective use of our government resources or taxpayer monies.

President Obama, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates and Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs, have all publicly advocated for the repeal of this harmful law. There is no legal or military justification and not one shred of credible evidence that supports continuing the discriminatory DADT law, and considering the guidance of the commander-in-chief and the nation’s top two defense officials, we urge you to refrain from seeking an appeal. The federal court decision was a step in the right direction, and we are confident that the Senate will take the ultimate step by voting this fall on the fiscal year 2011 National Defense Authorization Act to permanently lift the ban on gays in the military. Although we understand that only action by Congress can bring real finality to this issue, we believe an appeal of the recent federal court decision could set back those congressional efforts. Therefore, we request your assistance in ensuring that we can eradicate this discriminatory law permanently and urge the Justice Department to choose not to appeal any court decision that would keep this law in place.

Thank you for your attention to this urgent matter. We look forward to hearing from you.


Read more: http://www.shewired.com/Article.cfm?ID=25910
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Chipper Chat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-13-10 03:52 PM
Response to Original message
1. I looked to see if any republican senators signed the letter.
:rofl:
:rofl: :rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-13-10 03:57 PM
Response to Original message
2. Where is Barbara Boxer? Edit: Never mind, there she is!
Edited on Wed Oct-13-10 03:57 PM by EFerrari
That's my Senator! :woohoo:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alp227 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-13-10 04:05 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. I betcha Fiorina would support an appeal wouldn't she?
Any candidate (regardless of party) who won't stand up for LGBT equal rights won't get my vote.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-13-10 04:16 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. Right there with you.
It's long past time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Behind the Aegis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-13-10 04:07 PM
Response to Original message
4. I am surprised, but proud of Mary Landrieu.
Didn't expect her to do this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-14-10 05:05 AM
Response to Reply #4
17. Surprised me too. Hope everyone who feels similarly sends her a "way to go" message.
You KNOW she will hear from those who don't approve.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hawkeye-X Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-13-10 04:19 PM
Response to Original message
6. At least Bennet gets 50-50% of a vote from me or not..
Still haven't gotten my ballot, so will decide soon.....

He, at least, did the right thing here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
napi21 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-13-10 04:27 PM
Response to Original message
7. I also sent an email to the WH yesterday asking the same thing.
I explained to Pres Obama that this judge had given him an early Christmas gift, enabling him to get DADT abolished without haing to take any political hits for doing so. I also made sure to tell him that I'm an old (66 years) straight white lady so he'd understand that I have no dog i this fight. I HOPE he encourage his DOJ to just be TOO Busy with other things!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-14-10 05:09 AM
Response to Reply #7
18. Every human has a dog in the fight for equal rights for all humans, but I know what you mean.
Edited on Thu Oct-14-10 05:19 AM by No Elephants
I make sure I mention I am hetero--and Christian--whenever I contact a pol about equal rights for members of the GLBT community. I usually also say those are 2 things that no American should have to mention to an elected official, which only shows how un-American laws are that are based on one interpretation of the Bible of many possible religious and secular interpretations.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
iandhr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-13-10 04:45 PM
Original message
Is not appealing the law legal?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tesha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-13-10 05:40 PM
Response to Original message
10. No one is required to defend an unconstitutional law, no matter how many times...
...a few DUers tell you otherwise. The Administration could quite
easily let this end *RIGHT NOW*.

Tesha
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
iandhr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-13-10 04:45 PM
Response to Original message
8. Is not appealing the law legal?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JonLP24 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-14-10 05:05 PM
Response to Reply #8
24. Yes
The justice department is just required to defend whatever laws when they are first challenged. If they lose the case they are not required to keep appealing until they lose it all the way to the Supreme Court.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
frederico Donating Member (4 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-13-10 05:17 PM
Response to Original message
9. As far as I know, Holder is obligated to defend all existing laws
it is his job.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
t0dd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-13-10 06:09 PM
Response to Reply #9
11.  Jerry Brown refused to defend Prop 8 in court.
Edited on Wed Oct-13-10 06:11 PM by t0dd
Despite that being at the state-level, how is it any different? Where is it stated anywhere the DoJ has to defend laws they consider unconstitutional?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dragonfli Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-13-10 06:38 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. As far as you know, you know more than these senaters, you
must be brilliant and they must all be rather stupid eh?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
no limit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-14-10 12:56 PM
Response to Reply #9
20. What you know is the product of a serious disinformation campaign
the same campaign that is telling us federal judges only affect their local districts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Yeshuah Ben Joseph Donating Member (763 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-13-10 06:43 PM
Response to Original message
13. Mary Landrieu actually did something DEMOCRATIC?
Are the oil fumes in the bayou getting to her or something?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ian David Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-13-10 09:10 PM
Response to Original message
14. Someone on NPR was saying that if they don't appeal, this might make it worse.
They were saying that they'd revert to the old pre-DADT rules that sanctioned active witch hunts.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
no limit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-14-10 12:55 PM
Response to Reply #14
19. That's bullshit. The judge's order says they can't discharge gay people, period
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ian David Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-14-10 01:35 PM
Response to Reply #19
21. Then someone was either misinformed or full of shit. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
no limit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-14-10 02:53 PM
Response to Reply #21
22. There is floods of misinformation out there about what this ruling means
if only we had some kind of media that could correct the record on all these things (a guy can dream, can't he?).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Carnage251 Donating Member (302 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-13-10 11:54 PM
Response to Original message
15. Mary Landrieu signed it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-14-10 12:12 AM
Response to Original message
16. Clearly these senators know nothing about the Constitution,
or googledimensional intergalactic chess.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bullwinkle428 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-14-10 04:38 PM
Response to Reply #16
23. They clearly could use some schooling on the part of the great legal minds
that populate the Interwebs!!

:evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 12:48 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC