Big developing issue to effect all branches, DADT (Dont ask dont tell) policy
10-21-2010, 07:43 AM
#1
12 Second Club
Thread Starter
iTrader: (23)
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Hampton, VA
Posts: 220
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Big developing issue to effect all branches, DADT (Dont ask dont tell) policy I am a Paralegal by MOS in the US Army and have been doing it for over 15 years. With this job I have seen regulations change and updated, but this I would say would be the biggest change, if enacted, I have seen in my career. So I wanted to see how the other military hotrodders feel and think about this. Here is some info I have received through my leadership channels about the DADT policy and what is happening in the courts and services:
Judge orders 'don't ask, don't tell' injunction
Email Print By JULIE WATSON, Associated Press Writer Julie Watson, Associated Press Writer – 7 mins ago SAN DIEGO – A federal judge issued a worldwide injunction Tuesday stopping enforcement of the "don't ask, don't tell" policy, ending the U.S. military's 17-year-old ban on openly gay troops.
U.S. District Court Judge Virginia Phillips' landmark ruling was widely cheered by gay rights organizations that credited her with getting accomplished what President Obama and Washington politics could not.
U.S. Department of Justice attorneys have 60 days to appeal. Legal experts say they are under no legal obligation to do so and could let Phillips' ruling stand.
The federal government is reviewing the ruling and has no immediate comment, said Tracy Schmaler, spokesman for the Department of Justice.
Phillips declared the law unconstitutional after a two-week nonjury trial in federal court in Riverside 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 military 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.
Pentagon shuts down enforcement of gay ban
By Andrew Tilghman - Staff writer
Posted : Thursday Oct 14, 2010 21:54:52 EDT
The Pentagon on Thursday issued a worldwide moratorium on investigations and separations of gay service members under the 17-year-old “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy, complying with the order of a California federal judge who declared unconstitutional the ban on open military service by gays.
The move came two days after Judge Virginia Phillips handed down an injunction ordering the Defense Department to “suspend and discontinue” any proceedings related to the policy.
Simultaneously on Thursday, the Justice Department filed for an emergency stay, or a temporary freeze, of Phillips’ injunction, and said it will appeal her decision.
In a sworn statement submitted along with the appeal shortly after the Pentagon announcement, Clifford Stanley, undersecretary of defense for personnel and readiness, argued strongly for a stay of the injunction while the government’s appeal is heard.
Discuss
The Pentagon moratorium on enforcing ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ Related reading Justice Department still wants delay in stopping DADT
Group says Air Force has stopped enforcing gay ban during the appeals process, “the military should not be required to suddenly and immediately restructure a major personnel policy that has been in place for years, particularly during a time when the nation is involved in combat operations overseas,” Stanley said.
“An injunction before the appeal in this case has run its course will place gay and lesbian service members in a position of grave uncertainty,” he said. “If the court’s decision were later reversed, the military would be faced with the question of whether to discharge any service members who have revealed their sexual orientation in reliance on this court’s decision and injunction. Such an injunction therefore should not be entered before appellate review has been completed.
“The stakes here are so high, and the potential harm so great, that caution is in order,” Stanley said.
But for now, in the absence of a stay, the Defense Department “will abide by the terms in the court’s ruling, effective as of the time and date of the ruling,” Pentagon spokesman Marine Col. David Lapan said Thursday.
The Pentagon on Thursday informed the judge advocates general for each of the services of the standing injunction and instructed them to advise commanders accordingly.
Advocates for gay service members cautioned against any public statements about their homosexuality. “Service members should not come out. They remain vulnerable, we believe, under ‘don’t ask don’t tell,’” said Trevor Thomas, a spokesman for the Service Members Legal Defense Network, which provides free legal services for gay troops.
Phillips sits on the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, which covers seven counties. It is part of the 9th Circuit, which covers Alaska, Hawaii, the West Coast states, Arizona, Idaho and Montana.
An appeal of her injunction would go to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit. Either side could then take it to the Supreme Court.
One day after Phillips’ ruling, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said that abruptly ending the military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy would have “enormous consequences” for the troops.
Gates told reporters that the question of whether to repeal the law should be decided by Congress, and only after the Pentagon completes a sweeping study of the issue that is due by Dec. 1. He said he feels strongly that legislation, not a court order, should determine the policy.
Gates has said the purpose of the Pentagon study is not to determine whether to change the law — something he says is probably inevitable but up for Congress to decide. Rather, the study is intended to determine how to best lift the ban without causing serious disruption during wartime.
Phillips declared the law unconstitutional after a two-week nonjury trial in federal court in Riverside, Calif., and indicated she would issue a nationwide injunction. But she asked first for input from Justice Department attorneys and the Log Cabin Republicans, the gay-rights group that filed the lawsuit in 2004 to stop the ban’s enforcement.
The Justice Department also argued that Congress should decide the issue — not her court.
Phillips disagreed, saying the law does not enhance military readiness but instead has a “direct and deleterious effect” on the armed forces by hurting recruiting during wartime and requiring the discharge of service members with critical skills and training.
After listening to testimony from military officers who have been discharged under the policy, Phillips also said the law violates the free-speech and due process rights of service members.
In the past, President Obama has echoed Gates in his view that Congress, not the courts, should decide whether to repeal “don’t ask, don’t tell.”
“The president has taken a very consistent position here, and that is: ‘I will not use my discretion in any way that will step on Congress’ ability to be the sole decider about this policy,’ “ said Diane Mazur, legal co-director of the Palm Center, a think tank at the University of California at Santa Barbara that supports repeal.
Judge orders 'don't ask, don't tell' injunction
Email Print By JULIE WATSON, Associated Press Writer Julie Watson, Associated Press Writer – 7 mins ago SAN DIEGO – A federal judge issued a worldwide injunction Tuesday stopping enforcement of the "don't ask, don't tell" policy, ending the U.S. military's 17-year-old ban on openly gay troops.
U.S. District Court Judge Virginia Phillips' landmark ruling was widely cheered by gay rights organizations that credited her with getting accomplished what President Obama and Washington politics could not.
U.S. Department of Justice attorneys have 60 days to appeal. Legal experts say they are under no legal obligation to do so and could let Phillips' ruling stand.
The federal government is reviewing the ruling and has no immediate comment, said Tracy Schmaler, spokesman for the Department of Justice.
Phillips declared the law unconstitutional after a two-week nonjury trial in federal court in Riverside 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 military 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.
Pentagon shuts down enforcement of gay ban
By Andrew Tilghman - Staff writer
Posted : Thursday Oct 14, 2010 21:54:52 EDT
The Pentagon on Thursday issued a worldwide moratorium on investigations and separations of gay service members under the 17-year-old “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy, complying with the order of a California federal judge who declared unconstitutional the ban on open military service by gays.
The move came two days after Judge Virginia Phillips handed down an injunction ordering the Defense Department to “suspend and discontinue” any proceedings related to the policy.
Simultaneously on Thursday, the Justice Department filed for an emergency stay, or a temporary freeze, of Phillips’ injunction, and said it will appeal her decision.
In a sworn statement submitted along with the appeal shortly after the Pentagon announcement, Clifford Stanley, undersecretary of defense for personnel and readiness, argued strongly for a stay of the injunction while the government’s appeal is heard.
Discuss
The Pentagon moratorium on enforcing ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ Related reading Justice Department still wants delay in stopping DADT
Group says Air Force has stopped enforcing gay ban during the appeals process, “the military should not be required to suddenly and immediately restructure a major personnel policy that has been in place for years, particularly during a time when the nation is involved in combat operations overseas,” Stanley said.
“An injunction before the appeal in this case has run its course will place gay and lesbian service members in a position of grave uncertainty,” he said. “If the court’s decision were later reversed, the military would be faced with the question of whether to discharge any service members who have revealed their sexual orientation in reliance on this court’s decision and injunction. Such an injunction therefore should not be entered before appellate review has been completed.
“The stakes here are so high, and the potential harm so great, that caution is in order,” Stanley said.
But for now, in the absence of a stay, the Defense Department “will abide by the terms in the court’s ruling, effective as of the time and date of the ruling,” Pentagon spokesman Marine Col. David Lapan said Thursday.
The Pentagon on Thursday informed the judge advocates general for each of the services of the standing injunction and instructed them to advise commanders accordingly.
Advocates for gay service members cautioned against any public statements about their homosexuality. “Service members should not come out. They remain vulnerable, we believe, under ‘don’t ask don’t tell,’” said Trevor Thomas, a spokesman for the Service Members Legal Defense Network, which provides free legal services for gay troops.
Phillips sits on the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, which covers seven counties. It is part of the 9th Circuit, which covers Alaska, Hawaii, the West Coast states, Arizona, Idaho and Montana.
An appeal of her injunction would go to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit. Either side could then take it to the Supreme Court.
One day after Phillips’ ruling, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said that abruptly ending the military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy would have “enormous consequences” for the troops.
Gates told reporters that the question of whether to repeal the law should be decided by Congress, and only after the Pentagon completes a sweeping study of the issue that is due by Dec. 1. He said he feels strongly that legislation, not a court order, should determine the policy.
Gates has said the purpose of the Pentagon study is not to determine whether to change the law — something he says is probably inevitable but up for Congress to decide. Rather, the study is intended to determine how to best lift the ban without causing serious disruption during wartime.
Phillips declared the law unconstitutional after a two-week nonjury trial in federal court in Riverside, Calif., and indicated she would issue a nationwide injunction. But she asked first for input from Justice Department attorneys and the Log Cabin Republicans, the gay-rights group that filed the lawsuit in 2004 to stop the ban’s enforcement.
The Justice Department also argued that Congress should decide the issue — not her court.
Phillips disagreed, saying the law does not enhance military readiness but instead has a “direct and deleterious effect” on the armed forces by hurting recruiting during wartime and requiring the discharge of service members with critical skills and training.
After listening to testimony from military officers who have been discharged under the policy, Phillips also said the law violates the free-speech and due process rights of service members.
In the past, President Obama has echoed Gates in his view that Congress, not the courts, should decide whether to repeal “don’t ask, don’t tell.”
“The president has taken a very consistent position here, and that is: ‘I will not use my discretion in any way that will step on Congress’ ability to be the sole decider about this policy,’ “ said Diane Mazur, legal co-director of the Palm Center, a think tank at the University of California at Santa Barbara that supports repeal.
...Continued next post...
10-21-2010, 07:45 AM
#2
12 Second Club
Thread Starter
iTrader: (23)
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Hampton, VA
Posts: 220
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Appeals court: Gay ban can stay, for now
By Lisa Leff - The Associated Press
Posted : Wednesday Oct 20, 2010 21:37:48 EDT
SAN FRANCISCO — A federal appeals court on Wednesday temporarily granted the government’s request for a freeze on a judge’s order requiring the military to allow openly gay troops.
A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals instructed lawyers for the gay rights group that brought the lawsuit successfully challenging “don’t ask, don’t tell” to file arguments in response by Monday.
The judges would then decide whether to extend the temporary stay while it considers the government’s appeal of U.S. District Judge Virginia Phillips’ ruling that the policy was unconstitutional.
It was unclear what effect the temporary freeze would have on the Pentagon, which has already informed recruiters to accept openly gay recruits and has suspended discharge proceedings for gay service members.
Recruiters told to accept gay applicants Discuss Appeals court ruling Cynthia Smith, a Pentagon spokeswoman, said “for the reasons stated in the government’s submission, we believe a stay is appropriate.”
She declined to say whether the Defense Department would roll back its guidance to military lawyers and recruiters that they must abide by last week’s injunction. It has been assumed that the Pentagon would revert to its previous policy of “don’t ask, don’t tell” if a stay were to be granted throughout the appeals process.
The White House referred questions to the Justice Department. Alisa Finelli, a spokesperson for the Justice Department, declined to comment Wednesday.
President Obama said last week that the Clinton-era law “will end on my watch” but added that “it has to be done in a way that is orderly, because we are involved in a war right now.” He said he supports repeal of the policy, but only after careful review and an act of Congress.
A lawyer for the Log Cabin Republicans said the group was disappointed, but called it a minor setback. The group, which brought its lawsuit in 2004, argues that forcing gays in uniform to remain silent about their personal lives violates their First Amendment rights and that the military’s reluctance to end the policy was based on unfounded fears, not facts.
“We hope that the 9th Circuit will recognize the inherent contradiction in the government’s arguments for a longer stay in light of eight full days of non-enforcement with no ‘enormous consequences,’ ” said Alexander Nicholson, a gay veteran who also was a plaintiff in the Log Cabin lawsuit.
Government lawyers argue that striking down the policy and ordering the Pentagon to immediately allow openly gay service members could harm troop morale and unit cohesion when the military is fighting two wars.
The brief order was signed by the three 9th Circuit judges hearing emergency motions this month: Diarmuid F. O’Scannlain and Stephen S. Trott, who were appointed by President Reagan, and William A. Fletcher, an appointee of President Clinton.
AGAIN these are press releases that were emailed to me by Leadership to help keep the Soldiers informed.
What we are being told: As for now, the DADT policy has not changed, there is an appeal in effect in the court system.
My feelings: As a Paralegal and Noncommissioned Officer, I am bound to abide by and uphold Military Regulations and Orders. Whatever change is made, if any, I will continue to abide and enforce. I have served and have known of Soldiers that have been in violation of this policy, it comes with the job as a Paralegal, and we have to do the paperwork, read the statements, and know the details of things like this as well as other things. Through my career, I have seen, read and witnessed what Soldiers are capable of. I am not talking just with the DADT policy either. I have been involved with cases from Soldiers cussing out their NCOs and Officers, to cases dealing with a triple murder, so I have seen allot. To me, I look at this as another potential change that I will have to accept and learn to Soldier on through. As a Soldier that has been deployed 3 times, working on my 4th, I look at all my comrade in arms the same way, a person trying to live, survive, build a career, or just serving their country proudly and I try not to classify any of the Soldiers I serve with by race, color, or beliefs, and just as a Soldier and person and human being.
Ok, let’s hear the responses.
By Lisa Leff - The Associated Press
Posted : Wednesday Oct 20, 2010 21:37:48 EDT
SAN FRANCISCO — A federal appeals court on Wednesday temporarily granted the government’s request for a freeze on a judge’s order requiring the military to allow openly gay troops.
A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals instructed lawyers for the gay rights group that brought the lawsuit successfully challenging “don’t ask, don’t tell” to file arguments in response by Monday.
The judges would then decide whether to extend the temporary stay while it considers the government’s appeal of U.S. District Judge Virginia Phillips’ ruling that the policy was unconstitutional.
It was unclear what effect the temporary freeze would have on the Pentagon, which has already informed recruiters to accept openly gay recruits and has suspended discharge proceedings for gay service members.
Recruiters told to accept gay applicants Discuss Appeals court ruling Cynthia Smith, a Pentagon spokeswoman, said “for the reasons stated in the government’s submission, we believe a stay is appropriate.”
She declined to say whether the Defense Department would roll back its guidance to military lawyers and recruiters that they must abide by last week’s injunction. It has been assumed that the Pentagon would revert to its previous policy of “don’t ask, don’t tell” if a stay were to be granted throughout the appeals process.
The White House referred questions to the Justice Department. Alisa Finelli, a spokesperson for the Justice Department, declined to comment Wednesday.
President Obama said last week that the Clinton-era law “will end on my watch” but added that “it has to be done in a way that is orderly, because we are involved in a war right now.” He said he supports repeal of the policy, but only after careful review and an act of Congress.
A lawyer for the Log Cabin Republicans said the group was disappointed, but called it a minor setback. The group, which brought its lawsuit in 2004, argues that forcing gays in uniform to remain silent about their personal lives violates their First Amendment rights and that the military’s reluctance to end the policy was based on unfounded fears, not facts.
“We hope that the 9th Circuit will recognize the inherent contradiction in the government’s arguments for a longer stay in light of eight full days of non-enforcement with no ‘enormous consequences,’ ” said Alexander Nicholson, a gay veteran who also was a plaintiff in the Log Cabin lawsuit.
Government lawyers argue that striking down the policy and ordering the Pentagon to immediately allow openly gay service members could harm troop morale and unit cohesion when the military is fighting two wars.
The brief order was signed by the three 9th Circuit judges hearing emergency motions this month: Diarmuid F. O’Scannlain and Stephen S. Trott, who were appointed by President Reagan, and William A. Fletcher, an appointee of President Clinton.
AGAIN these are press releases that were emailed to me by Leadership to help keep the Soldiers informed.
What we are being told: As for now, the DADT policy has not changed, there is an appeal in effect in the court system.
My feelings: As a Paralegal and Noncommissioned Officer, I am bound to abide by and uphold Military Regulations and Orders. Whatever change is made, if any, I will continue to abide and enforce. I have served and have known of Soldiers that have been in violation of this policy, it comes with the job as a Paralegal, and we have to do the paperwork, read the statements, and know the details of things like this as well as other things. Through my career, I have seen, read and witnessed what Soldiers are capable of. I am not talking just with the DADT policy either. I have been involved with cases from Soldiers cussing out their NCOs and Officers, to cases dealing with a triple murder, so I have seen allot. To me, I look at this as another potential change that I will have to accept and learn to Soldier on through. As a Soldier that has been deployed 3 times, working on my 4th, I look at all my comrade in arms the same way, a person trying to live, survive, build a career, or just serving their country proudly and I try not to classify any of the Soldiers I serve with by race, color, or beliefs, and just as a Soldier and person and human being.
Ok, let’s hear the responses.
10-21-2010, 07:55 AM
#3
Heres where it gets stupid. The Marine Corps has already had 2 seperate instances where gay individuals came in to enlist with a camera crew to record it. The only thing gayer than sucking a dick is wanting to join the military just to make a spectale about it because your gay.
Ive put in a gay person before, and he was probably worth to us than a lot of straight people I put in. Not every gay person is a limp wristed bitch. Some are like Rob Halford.
Ive put in a gay person before, and he was probably worth to us than a lot of straight people I put in. Not every gay person is a limp wristed bitch. Some are like Rob Halford.
10-21-2010, 08:45 AM
#4
heres where it gets stupid. The marine corps has already had 2 seperate instances where gay individuals came in to enlist with a camera crew to record it. The only thing gayer than sucking a dick is wanting to join the military just to make a spectale about it because your gay.
11-06-2010, 10:04 AM
#5
TECH Regular
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Orlaanndoooo
Posts: 475
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As shocked as I am to hear the administration say it I fully agree that this should be handled by congress legislating rather than a judge legislating.
The time frame is a tossup to me, torn between trying to enact a change too quickly (begging for things to get screwed up and done poorly) and too damn slowly (a large govt agency getting something done can be outpaced by the erosion that made the Grand Canyon).
As for gay soldiers, meh. I've served with a number of them, some oh so obvious some that were shockers. Didn't affect their ability to do their job with amazing skill and professionalism. I'm proud to have served with them and in a couple of instances am quite grateful they were there in nasty situations. They were and are valuable members of a team of professionals--working, fighting, bleeding, and dying for their fellow soldiers and for their country.
I reasoned long ago (and shockingly enough it is true) that, much like a straight guy isn't attracted to every girl on the planet (and is quite repulsed by some) a gay guy isn't attracted to every guy on the planet.
The time frame is a tossup to me, torn between trying to enact a change too quickly (begging for things to get screwed up and done poorly) and too damn slowly (a large govt agency getting something done can be outpaced by the erosion that made the Grand Canyon).
As for gay soldiers, meh. I've served with a number of them, some oh so obvious some that were shockers. Didn't affect their ability to do their job with amazing skill and professionalism. I'm proud to have served with them and in a couple of instances am quite grateful they were there in nasty situations. They were and are valuable members of a team of professionals--working, fighting, bleeding, and dying for their fellow soldiers and for their country.
I reasoned long ago (and shockingly enough it is true) that, much like a straight guy isn't attracted to every girl on the planet (and is quite repulsed by some) a gay guy isn't attracted to every guy on the planet.