Box Turtle Bulletin

Box Turtle BulletinNews, analysis and fact-checking of anti-gay rhetoric
“Now you must raise your children up in a world where that union of man and box turtle is on the same legal footing as man and wife…”
This article can be found at:
Latest Posts

Judge orders immediate end to DADT

Timothy Kincaid

October 12th, 2010

Judge Phillips has responded positively to Log Cabin Republicans’ request for an immediate and worldwide injunction against the military’s anti-gay Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy (CNN):

A federal judge ordered Tuesday that the U.S. military stop enforcing the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy.

Judge Virginia Phillips ordered the military “immediately to suspend and discontinue any investigation, or discharge, separation, or other proceeding, that may have been commenced” under the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy.

Updates (Jim Burroway): Log Cabin Republicans, who brought the successful lawsuit to federal court, cautioned servicemembers against coming out at this time, since the Justice Department still has sixty days in which it can appeal.

White House press secretary Robert Gibbs told The Advocate that he didn’t know whether the Administration would seek a stay of the ruling. He also didn’t know if any steps had been made to bring the Pentagon into compliance with the injuinction. Instead, he said, “, nor did he know if any steps have been taken to bring the Pentagon into compliance with the injunction. Gibbs said, “The president will continue to work as hard as he can to change the law that he believes is fundamentally unfair.” It seems to me that Judge Phillips already took care of that task. 

Here is the full text of the injunction:

TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:
This action was tried by Judge Virginia A. Phillips without a jury on July 13-16 and 20-23, 2010. The Court filed a Memorandum Opinion on September 9, 2010 (Doc. 232), and an Amended & Final Memorandum Opinion, and Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, on October 8, 2010. For all the reasons set forth therein, the Court:

(1) DECLARES that the act known as “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” infringes the fundamental rights of United States servicemembers and prospective servicemembers and violates (a) the substantive due process rights guaranteed under the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution, and (b) the rights to freedom of speech and to petition the Government for redress of grievances guaranteed by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.

(2) PERMANENTLY ENJOINS Defendants United States of America and the Secretary of Defense, their agents, servants, officers, employees, and attorneys, and all persons acting in participation or concert with them or under their direction or command, from enforcing or applying the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” Act and implementing regulations, against any person under their jurisdiction or command;

(3) ORDERS Defendants United States of America and the Secretary of Defense immediately to suspend and discontinue any investigation, or discharge, separation, or other proceeding, that may have been commenced under the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” Act, or pursuant to 10 U.S.C. § 654 or its implementing regulations, on or prior to the date of this Judgment.

(4) GRANTS Plaintiff Log Cabin Republicans’ request to apply for attorneys’ fees pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412; and

(5) GRANTS Plaintiff Log Cabin Republicans’ request to file a motion for costs of suit, to the extent allowed by law.

Comments

POST COMMENT | COMMENT RSS 2.0

Pender
October 12th, 2010 | LINK

Holy smokes!

What happens now? Is DADT instantaneously suspended while DOJ scurries around deciding whether to appeal or trying to get an emergency injunction?

John
October 12th, 2010 | LINK

So what time does our “fierce advocate” file the appeal?

Lindoro Almaviva
October 12th, 2010 | LINK

And i will be the first one to eat a little humble pie and say that the LCR did a bang of a job on this one. They have earned my respect.

Today, many people who dismissed the LCR, like me, need to reassess what we said about them. It is a good day to be a Log Cabin republican in this country.

Bernie
October 12th, 2010 | LINK

Thank God!! A step in the right direction for once.

God Bless our Soldiers.

Ray
October 12th, 2010 | LINK

“It seems to me the Judge Phillips already took care of that task. ”

Touche! Le Coup de grâce!

Tone
October 12th, 2010 | LINK

The White House has appealed a previous instance of DADT being overturned by a lower court haven’t they? Why would they stop screwing US soldiers now just when they’re loving it?

Everett
October 12th, 2010 | LINK

While I’m sure the Justice Department will appeal this original ruling of Judge Phillips because the DOJ should defend laws enacted by Congress…I do NOT think that the DOJ is obliged to appeal a ruling on an injunction everytime. And so, I think the DOJ does have a bit of wiggle room in which it can appeal Judge Phillips’ intial ruling that asserted that DADT is unconstitutional, but the DOJ does not have to appeal this injunction…But knowing Mr. Obama (Is it Nov. 2012 yet?) his DOJ will likely even appeal the injunction ruling, which is unfortunate.

Robin
October 12th, 2010 | LINK

Does this mean then that all those service people who received “dishonorable discharge” because they were gay are now allowed to get their release papers reclassified in a more favorable light?

Those are the ones that paid the price for such a screwed up policy, and really deserve retribution.

Mark F.
October 12th, 2010 | LINK

Our “fierce advocate” already appealled, John. That was quick!

occono
October 12th, 2010 | LINK

^ I think you’re mixing up DOMA and DADT there.

Rob San Diego
October 12th, 2010 | LINK

I’m placing my bet that of the 60 day appeal, the DOJ will wait till day 58, just like they did in DOMA. They will wait to the last minute.

Good question Robin, I’m curious to see what happens.

Mark F.
October 12th, 2010 | LINK

Yep, you’re right re: the appeal. But I don’t doubt there will be one.

Aeval
October 13th, 2010 | LINK

Does this ruling mean that gay service men and women can come out openly now, or do they still need be cautious?

John
October 13th, 2010 | LINK

Aeval: NO. Anyone who is gay and currently in the service should NOT “come out” because DADT is still in effect regardless of this judges’ order. The Administration has 60 days to file an appeal and you can bet that they will.

Jonathan
October 13th, 2010 | LINK

I wonder if the folks at The Advocate were able to restrain their laughter when Gibbs said, “The president will continue to work as hard as he can to change the law that he believes is fundamentally unfair.”

Obama’s mouth must get pretty chapped working so hard to give us lip service when he’s not blowing the Pentagon.

enough already
October 13th, 2010 | LINK

It is 100% certain that this administration will appeal.

One could be charitable and point out that they are trying to:
a) Restore constitutional order after Bush.
b) Trying to avoid another Roe vs. Wade situation – the Catholics, Mormons and all the other christianists will never accept a Supreme Court decision as law.

I’m not feeling charitable right now, I’m furious as can be that I have to vote in a few weeks for the Democrats. The alternative is unthinkable.

Greg
October 13th, 2010 | LINK

Everett, when I took my Government class and college poli sci classes we talked about this thing called “checks and balances”. The Executive’s check on the Legislative is that it can choose how, when, or if (barring injunction by the Judiciary) to enforce laws.

Already, the Obama Administration has been told not to enforce the anti-marijuana laws in states where medical marijuana is legal. There are some rogues bucking the Administration (who somehow haven’t been replaced–remember all members of the DOJ serve at the pleasure of the President). There have been other cases. The Legislative does not have supreme authority and the Executive isn’t straitjacketed.

Mortanius
October 13th, 2010 | LINK

“Once again, an activist federal judge is using the military to advance a liberal social agenda, disregarding the views of all four military service chiefs and the constitutional role of Congress,” said Family Research Council President Tony Perkins, adding that this should be an issue in the Nov. 2 congressional elections.

Funny how this Federal Judge is an activist judge when we didn’t hear a peep out of them for the last 2-3 Federal Judges with similar rulings about equal rights, oh, that’s right they were appointed by Republican Presidents, this one was appointed by Clinton. FLAME ON FRC and all the other right wing religious bigots.

Kevin
October 13th, 2010 | LINK

enoughalready,

go vote democratic. i understand and basically agree with your perspective on the alternative, but do NOT give $$$…and let them know why you’re not going to donate and when you’ll return to financial support.

the political parties need cash just about as much as they need votes. notice how much the dems are trailing in money. the liberal base has locked its collective wallet.

Carmen Diaz
October 13th, 2010 | LINK

It’s good, but I hate it when our human rights now have to have some basis in the Constitution as if our rights flow from the government, and we need a judge to tell us what they are.

Lucrece
October 13th, 2010 | LINK

Yes, human rights flow from the government because they’re human constructs. We AGREE and enforce the idea that human rights should be created, because they certainly are not self-evident and existent regardless of local convention.

If you have any doubts go visit the nearest crocodile infested waters and see how “obvious” human rights turn out to be. Or pay a visit to Saudi Arabia without a veil and highly revealing clothing.

Leave A Comment

All comments reflect the opinions of commenters only. They are not necessarily those of anyone associated with Box Turtle Bulletin. Comments are subject to our Comments Policy.

(Required)
(Required, never shared)

PLEASE NOTE: All comments are subject to our Comments Policy.