Justice Department appeals 'don't ask, don't tell' ruling

[James48]

Source: Govexec.com

Justice Department appeals 'don't ask, don't tell' ruling
By George E. Condon Jr. and Megan Scully CongressDaily October 15, 2010

The Justice Department Thursday requested a stay of a federal judge's injunction against enforcement of the "don't ask, don't tell" law that bars homosexual men and women from serving openly in the military. It also filed an appeal with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals challenging the judge's ruling that the 17-year-old law is unconstitutional.

The action drew immediate condemnation from gay and lesbian groups. Blasting it as "indefensible," Robin McGehee, director of GetEqual, said it was a sign of "yet another shocking lack of leadership" by the Obama White House.

"Yet again, we are faced with action by this administration that stands in stark contrast to the campaign rhetoric and lofty speeches about equality that continue to be served up as progress to our community," she said.



Read more: http://www.govexec.com/story_page.cfm?articleid=46324

[Lucky 13]

1. Can somebody explain this to me in a way that makes me not furious?

Cause I got nothing.

[atreides1]

2. Nope

Got nothing for you, Lucky 13.

[TeaBagsAreForCups]

3. Yes, it's simple and elemental...

... to this "Progressive" Presidency for which many of us - now proud to be termed - "Purity Pricks" on this site worked, contributed, and advocated - some of us for two years prior to his election:

1. We never read the fine print to understand precisely what a conciliatory POS this POTUS promised he would be and is now more than evidencing;
2. This POTUS has no balls, no real progressive convictions.

Fact: there is the real potential of the GOP finding yet again a vile and disgusting ascendancy with this November election.

Fact: they will do so with these truly evil and more than potentially dangerous TeaBaggers providing a strong element for this ascendancy.

Fact: with no real power deposed and inclined to take them on and beat them the fuck into the ground (which should have begun on the morning of January 21, 2009)...

...we are totally, absolutely, and permanently screwed.

[davidwparker]

4. It's part of Obama's master plan, see. Obama wants to

have someone from the executive branch -- which he oversees -- to appeal it so that he can work with the Legislative branch -- which he is coequal -- to get DADT overturned. (And, you know O's track record on working with the Legislative branch over these 2, long years.)

What you are not seeing, Lucky 13, is there is a grand plan to screw over average Americans by both sides of the aisle. When things like getting rid of DADT occur, then our gatekeepers have to step in.

This lawsuit by the Log Cabin REPUBLICANS really through a wrench into this DADT thing and this judge who said it was unconstitutional. Wow. Panic mode for the gatekeepers.

A corollary ...

It's like sunsetting the tax cuts for the top 2%. All they have to do is NOTHING. But, the gatekeepers really can't do that. They've got to step in and screw over the working class again. To keep me from paying about $5.78 more in taxes if all of it sunsets by doing NOTHING, the gatekeepers will step in because they are concerned with my tax burden and fix it -- ultimately, I get to keep my $5.78 next year, but later will have to pay out $6,592 over a longer term so that those making over 1,000,000 get to keep their $30,000 which they don't need.

*Numbers are fictitious. Just trying to give the idea of how it works. Just as long as you and I get screwed, outsourced, and in foreclosure, the gatekeepers can feel our pain and swear the other side is more scary.

:sarcasm:

[Tx4obama]

5. As it has been discussed on SEVERAL threads already....

Obama wants DADT to be repeal by Congress so that the repeal will be permanent (not by a ruling in a district level court by a judge).
The repeal of DADT is in the Defense Appropriations bill which the Congress will be voting on when they return to session after the election -- Congress was ready to vote on it a couple weeks ago but the republicans blocked cloture -- it will be back on the agenda soon.

[EFerrari]

6. None of that explains the appeal, sorry. n/t

[Bette Noir]

7. True that. There's nothing about the ruling that would prevent the Senate

from overturning DADT itself. It would be a belt-and-suspenders sort of thing. "You can't overturn this law; we're repealing it!"

[Tx4obama]

9. Regarding the request of the 'stay'

Reading their request for a STAY is enlightening, and helps make clear what the Administration's plan is for the policy. A few key excerpts below:

As the Court’s opinion recognizes, the President has made clear his view that DADT should be repealed. He is committed to an orderly repeal of DADT, and the Department’s Working Group is nearing completion of its study and recommendations on implementing repeal in an orderly manner. In contrast, the precipitous changes to military policy required by the Court’s injunction would result in a host of significant and immediate harms to the recognized public interest in ensuring that the Nation has strong and effective military operations. The injunction forces the Executive to immediately cease enforcing a statute enacted by Congress regarding military affairs, which alone creates harm justifying a stay. The injunction also requires an immediate and dramatic change in policy without allowing time to do so in an orderly and comprehensive way. For these reasons, a stay is necessary...

The precipitous changes required by the injunction would prevent the military from developing the necessary policies and regulations, and from conducting the necessary training and education of the force, to successfully adapt to the end of DADT...The DADT statute implicates dozens of DoD and Service policies and regulations that cover such disparate issues as benefits, re-accession, military equal opportunity, anti-harassment, and others. Amending these regulations would typically take several months, because of the need to notify and seek input from all affected to ensure that changes do not inadvertently result in unanticipated negative effects on the force. Properly implementing any change in policy would thus be a massive undertaking by the Department and the military and cannot be done overnight...

Thousands of military personnel have enforced the DADT statutory policy for many years. Thus, the end of DADT will require that these personnel receive training and instruction in a number of areas, including: (i) how the policy has changed; (ii) why the policy has changed; (iii) how the change in this policy affects other existing policies; (iv) appropriate treatment of gay and lesbian servicemembers who reveal their sexual orientation; (v) appropriate treatment of servicemembers who object to serving with servicemembers they know to be gay or lesbian; and (vi) principles to consider when handling other issues that may arise after the elimination of the DADT statute. The immediate injunction ordered by the Court does not permit adequate time for this necessary training and instruction to occur.

Developing proper training tools regarding the end of DADT and communicating any new policy effectively to the millions of personnel at issue will take time and effort and cannot happen immediately, especially for commanders and servicemembers serving in theaters of active combat. The failure to provide proper training and effective communication regarding any change in the enforcement of DADT would be disruptive to military commanders and to servicemembers as they attempt to carry out their mission and military responsibilities, especially in active theaters of combat. The Department is actively engaged in developing educational and training tools and a plan for effective communication so as to allow the orderly discontinuation of DADT, and the injunction should be stayed so that process can be completed. An immediate court-ordered end to the statutory policy would place the military in a position of devising solutions on-the-fly, rather than responsibly implementing the careful planning that is currently being conducted by the Working Group...

Finally, a stay pending appeal would help to avoid the confusion and uncertainty that would be caused by an order temporarily enjoining enforcement of DADT, with the looming possibility that the statutory policy could be reinstated on appeal. Enjoining the operation of the statute before any appeal is concluded would create tremendous uncertainty about the status of servicemembers who may reveal their sexual orientation in reliance on this Court’s decision and injunction.

------------------
I haven't read The DOJ's 'APPEAL' or any analysis of the 'appeal' which they just filed today.

[EFerrari]

12. And none of that explains the appeal, either.

The Pentagon is constantly training people and lack of training is not a compelling reason to deny civil rights to Americans. If the Pentagon is too confused and uncertain to implement this change, they need to get into another line of work.

[Tx4obama]

13. The appeal...

Have you gone and read the appeal that was filed today?
There is probably a link to it somewhere on the net by now.
The text of the appeal probably has the explanation that you are looking for :)

[Tx4obama]

14. The explanation in the article link below...

http://www.govexec.com/story_page.cfm?articleid=46324

[boppers]

21. Thanks for that link. eom

[TheEuclideanOne]

18. Every place I go, people are quoting excerpts from the request of the stay.

Just kidding. Who in the hell is going to really read that shit, except maybe bored lawyers. I could not make it past the 2nd sentence without my eyes glazing over.

Let me summarize it: Obama wants to remove all doubt that he has even the smallest intention of following his campaign promises. The way I see it, he is going to truly amazing steps here, in fact, he has gone way beyond any politician in the history of our country. Most will just ignore their campaign promises and hope nobody notices. Not good enough for Obama. Here is how I see it.....

a) Not only did the opposition party have to make it happen. How embarrassing is that.

b) Not only did Obama have the chance to fulfill this campaign promise by basically doing NOTHING.

c) He is actually going to extra efforts to make sure that his campaign promise is not kept, not even by accident. When has that ever happened?

[boppers]

20. "Who in the hell is going to really read that shit"?

PEOPLE WHO PREFER FACTS TO SHOUTING AND WILD SPECULATION

[JustinL]

23. what a bunch of nauseating bullshit

Thousands of military personnel have enforced the DADT statutory policy for many years.

And thousands of southern school officials enforced racial segregation for many years. Big fucking deal.

Thus, the end of DADT will require that these personnel receive training and instruction in a number of areas, including: (i) how the policy has changed;

Easy: treat people the same regardless of sexual orientation. Big fucking deal.

(ii) why the policy has changed;

Easy: straight servicemembers are not better than gay or lesbian servicemembers.

(iii) how the change in this policy affects other existing policies;

What other policies? Why must the fundamental rights of gay and lesbian servicemembers continue to be violated because of others' vague uncertainty?

(iv) appropriate treatment of gay and lesbian servicemembers who reveal their sexual orientation;

Easy: the same as the appropriate treatment of straight servicemembers who reveal their sexual orientation. Big fucking deal.

(v) appropriate treatment of servicemembers who object to serving with servicemembers they know to be gay or lesbian;

Easy: the same as the appropriate treatment of servicemembers who object to serving with servicemembers they know to be African-American or Jewish.

(vi) principles to consider when handling other issues that may arise after the elimination of the DADT statute.

What other issues? Why must the fundamental rights of gay and lesbian servicemembers continue to be violated because of others' vague uncertainty?

Developing proper training tools regarding the end of DADT and communicating any new policy effectively to the millions of personnel at issue will take time and effort and cannot happen immediately

Someone should have told the Air Force. Note that the uncertainty described in the article is due to the adminsitration's refusal to immediately accept the ruling rather than to the ruling itself.

[Doctor_J]

8. Since Congress will take another lurch to the right in January,

And even with the current make-up, has done absolutely nothing for regular people, is going to make this major progressive step?

In chicago they like to say, "Who are you crappin'?""

[Tx4obama]

11. Congress will vote 'this year' on the repeal of DADT.

The permanent repeal of DADT is in the Defense Appropriations bill.

[activa8tr]

15. HUH!!!!!! We'll get a "repeal" of DADT from Congress that looks just like the

"Universal" health care we got from Congress.

We'll get something that costs a lot to implement, something that makes corporations, lawyers, and others very rich, and something that covers ONLY SOME of the gay and lesbian service members, no former service members, (pre-existing condition), and will start with officers first, (highest paid), and eventually "trickles down" to the lowly private by 2014.

THAT's what we can expect from Congress in terms of a "repeal".

[JustinL]

24. how exactly would accepting the ruling prevent Congress from passing the repeal? n/t

[davidinalameda]

10. that makes 2 of us

although I'm not getting furious any longer because if I got pissed at every anti-gay thing that the White House was doing, I'd be pissed most of the time

rather turn my anger into getting a real friend of the community elected in 2012

[activa8tr]

16. Lincoln had the cajones to free the slaves, whereas Obama would have ...

let emancipation be fought out in the courts year after year after year.

[DURHAM D]

17. You will recall that during the Gay Debate Obama indicated that he would

not have advised fighting the race based restriction on marriage (Loving v. Virginia) at that time.

Took awhile but I finally was able to lift my jaw off the floor. That told me everything I needed to know about his heart and his assertion that he would be a fierce advocate for my community.

Didn't anyone else hear that? Or was it just another one of his positions that everyone worked real hard to ignore.

I mean really - he was blowing off his own parents and his personal history. What a cold, cold fish.

[whistler162]

19. You do know Lincoln only freed the slaves in the parts of the

US that where in rebellion!

[boppers]

22. Yeah, Lincoln just issued an opinion, and nothing bad happened.

Equality was granted, and discrimination was ended, whee!