|| News ||
Page 1 of 1

Story Updated : October 14, 2010 05:19:00 PM

Govt. Appeals DADT Case


DADT UPDATE X390 (THINKSTOCK) | ADVOCATE.COM

The Department of Justice requested a stay Thursday of a federal judge's order barring further enforcement of "don't ask, don't tell." 

The government has also appealed U.S. district judge Virginia A. Phillips's September decision striking down DADT as unconstitutional to a federal appeals court. That appeal was filed to the court shortly after the Justice Department opposed the injunction against the 17-year-old law banning openly gay service members in the military. 

Should Phillips deny the Justice Department's request for a stay of her order, government attorneys will file an emergency request to the U.S. court of appeals for the ninth circuit.

“At a minimum, this case raises serious legal questions, and without the entry of an order immediately staying the application of this Court’s judgment, defendants will be irreparably harmed before they can appeal this Court’s decision to the Ninth Circuit,” assistant U.S. attorney Paul G. Freeborne wrote.

Justice Department spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler said in a statement that while the Obama administration supports repeal of DADT, "The Justice Department is defending the statute, as it traditionally does when acts of Congress are challenged."

Few were surprised by Thursday's rapid-fire news, least of all the leadership of the Log Cabin Republicans, which will oppose a stay of Phillips's injunction.

“After years of fighting this lawsuit, Log Cabin Republicans expected that the Obama administration would continue to pull out all the stops to defend ‘don’t ask, don’t tell,’” said Christian Berle, deputy executive director of the organization. “Log Cabin Republicans will continue to advocate on behalf of the American service members who every day sacrifice in defense of our nation and our Constitution.”

But Richard Socarides, a New York lawyer and former LGBT adviser to President Bill Clinton, said getting the stay on the suspension of discharges was not guaranteed and that if the court of appeals failed to grant it, the Justice Department would have to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.

In order to get the stay, Socarides said the government would have to prove it would suffer serious, irreversible damage if it were denied.

“It’s considered an extreme remedy,” Socarides said. “Just coming in and saying that it would be better to do it in a more orderly fashion isn’t enough.”

Socarides explained that DOJ was also in a tricky situation given the president’s position that he believes gays and lesbians should ultimately be able to serve openly in the military.

“They have severe political restrictions on what they can say,” Socarides said, noting that the Justice Department cannot argue, for instance, that allowing gays to serve openly would be harmful to the military. “They’re now in difficult position of having to articulate a position as to why, on an emergency basis, an order that is wholly consistent the president’s position should be denied.”

During a briefing with reporters Wednesday morning, White House press secretary reiterated the president’s belief that the law is “unjust” and “detrimental to our national security” but also reinforced his preference for ending the policy legislatively.

“The president has implemented a process with the Department of Defense, with the secretary of Defense, with Admiral [Michael] Mullen and the other members of the Joint Chiefs to move forward in implementing an end to this policy in an orderly way,” Gibbs said. “The best way to end it is for the Senate to follow the lead of the House of Representatives so that that end can be implemented in a fashion that’s consistent with our obligations in fighting two wars.”

But the political pressure continues to mount on the White House even as its course appears to be resolute.

During a phone call with progressive bloggers Wednesday, House speaker Nancy Pelosi said she would prefer the administration let the ruling stand.

“I hope, I haven’t really heard officially that the administration is going to appeal this, but in any event, I hope they don’t,” Pelosi said in reply to a question from AmericaBlog’s John Aravosis. “I myself have always wanted a moratorium on any discharges.”

Follow us on Twitter Follow us on Twitter. Follow us on Facebook Follow us on Facebook. Page 1 of 1
Reader Comments
  • Name: morris wise
    Date posted: 10/20/2010 10:26:08 PM
    Hometown: brooklyn

    Comment:

    Republican senators will never anger their base by voting to end DADT. The statement by Obama that he supports its repeal only after a careful review by the new Republican congress is rhetoric. An executive order ending DADT is all that is needed, but he will not defy millions of homophobes and their Republican representatives. The president has the gay votes in his pocket, his only concern is his return to power in 2012.

  • Name: Don Charles
    Date posted: 10/15/2010 12:46:20 PM
    Hometown: Kansas City

    Comment:

    I watched "Rachel Maddow" last night when she questioned the former Solicitor General about DADT repeal. I never heard anything so absurd as his argument for Obama fighting to uphold DADT in court. "We can't have the courts striking down an act of Congress"???!! WTF? What if that act of Congress is unconstitutional? Any Gay person who buys into the premise that repealing DADT should be a purely political endeavor evidently perceives the Gay Rights movement as something other than a Civil Rights crusade. A Civil Rights crusade is primarily driven by moral, not political considerations! It has a sense of urgency. There should also be a sense of urgency around retaining essential LesBiGay personnel in a time of war. The priorities of Barack Obama and just about everyone involved with this issue are tremendously f*cked up. Poor prioritizing in general is crippling our government.

  • Name: Chris Sullivan
    Date posted: 10/15/2010 12:42:34 PM
    Hometown: Chicago, IL

    Comment:

    Andrew W - I don't need to suck up to Obama for fear that he won't do what I want. I voted for him - he didn't vote for me - and now, I will withhold any and all future votes for him. I didn't trust him before he got in - but I knew McCain/Palin were too disturbed a pair to vote for. Don't get me wrong - Republicans are scum and many Democrats do excellent work on behlf of GLBT people - but Obama - he talks out of both sides of his mouth. His actions rarely are in sync with his words. He may be an eloquent speaker - but words don't win the GLBT community the Civil Rights we should be demanding. Seems the only area of American life where we are equal is when we pay taxes. Obama had options, real and good options - and he decided not to use them - so once again let me say - FUCK YOU OBAMA! A true enemy is better than a false friend.

  • Name: Robert Amsel
    Date posted: 10/15/2010 10:42:22 AM
    Hometown: Steelton, PA

    Comment:

    Obama's non-stop attempts at compromise with right-wingers while ignoring the party's base is responsible for his plummeting poll numbers. The sad part is that he's bringing the entire Democratic Party down with him. It's difficult for Democrats to run on their accomplishments for the midterms when their accomplishments have been so polluted by compromise, thanks mainly to Obama and Reid. Some people in Congress deserve to be brought down and will be making their exit after November. (Harry Reid may be included in this number. Maybe then we'll get a Senate Majority Leader with balls to help make up for our spineless president.) But I urge everyone gay to please vote on November 2nd for ALL PROGRESSIVE Democrats in local or national elections. Just because we're stuck with a lying hypocrite for a president doesn't mean we need to give the whole store away to the homophobic Repugs. There are plenty of good people who need our help and have actually fought for our interests.

  • Name: ahunt1@aol.com
    Date posted: 10/15/2010 10:16:14 AM
    Hometown: washington

    Comment:

    does this surprize anyone -holder and obama are so f... homophobic. they're prefect examples of the rampant homophobia in the afro-american/caribbean culture. so to the poor service men that put their faith in their c in chief and hrc.... you done been sold down da river by massa.

  • Name: Roy
    Date posted: 10/15/2010 1:05:33 AM
    Hometown: Morrilton, Arkansas

    Comment:

    Well I got news for you, all of the senators, congressmen and representatives from Arkansas voted not to end the ban on gays in the military. And I mean every damned fucking one of them.

  • Name: Rob
    Date posted: 10/14/2010 11:40:06 PM
    Hometown: Los Angeles

    Comment:

    Not all of the Democrats are to blame for the lack of progress on gay rights. Some of them have fought hard for us. If your congresspeople are among those who have really tried to help LGBT Americans, you should vote for them next month even if the party as a whole hasn't been good to us.

  • Name: Daniel
    Date posted: 10/14/2010 9:38:50 PM
    Hometown: St Joseph, MO

    Comment:

    It is not just the same old republican vs. democrat game this time around folks. This year we have an abundance of tea party crazy. Am I annoyed with the dems... hell yes, but I cannot let that keep me home and let O'Donnell and the other wackos win and have a say in governing for the next two or six years. Do you want wingnuts blocking more judge appointments? Do you really want Obama to pick judges that the tea party win approve of? What about the state houses. I know it sucks to have so many democrats break their promises to us again, but it would be worse if we help certain republicans to keep their campaign promises.

  • Name: Alan A. Katz
    Date posted: 10/14/2010 9:28:22 PM
    Hometown: Johnson City, NY

    Comment:

    To Mark, in Dallas Saying that McCain/Palin would have been worse is like telling a terminally ill patient that they're lucky they don't have leprosy. In reality, it would not have made one damned bit of difference. We still don't have marriage rights and DADT looks like it will continue on, unabated, while our ball-less President dithers around about "the proper ways to repeal it". It was a setup job, from day one. He needed our money, our votes, our help in his campaign. Once he took office, he didn't give a good damn about us or Progressives. He's a coward, and he ran around like a recalcitrant child begging Republicans to love him, while throwing us under the bus. Perhaps we need a few more years of Republicans (if we can survive it) to teach America a lesson. Or perhaps we just need a leader with spine - someone who believes in something, someone who keeps his promises. I will never vote for this fraud again. I feel like I got hoodwinked and used.

  • Name: Bryan
    Date posted: 10/14/2010 8:57:37 PM
    Hometown: Knoxville, TN

    Comment:

    Mark, do not take this personal because it is not meant to be. You are right that all the Republicans voted against the defence funding bill that had the repeal of DADT. The one thing that you did not point out that the two Republicans from Maine had said that they would support the bill UNTIL Harry Reid put in the Dream Act and limited the debate. Both Republicans called and told him that they would not be able to support this bill in this form. His response was, as you and everyone saw, that he was going to do it HIS way. Also, on top of all this the Service Members Legal Defence Fund reported not long after the vote was taken that the White House did not call ONE single Senator. I understand that the Republicans voted against it and I am NOT excusing them for that. However; this is one time that the real blame goes straight to Harry Reid and everyone in the White House. God I wish Hillary was President. We know now which one, Hillary or the President has the balls.

 PREVIOUS 1 2 3 4 NEXT  


 
 
Advocate Subscribe Promo Banner 300x50
 
Follow Us Follow Us on FacebookFollow Us on TwitterSubscribe to our RSS feedsDownload our app
Facebook Activity