iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Supreme Court Rejects Challenge To "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"

LARA JAKES   06/ 8/09 08:18 PM ET   AP

Dont Ask Dont Tell

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court refused on Monday to hear a legal challenge to the Pentagon's "don't ask, don't tell" policy, a decision that allows the Obama administration to continue its slow, back-burner response to liberal activists who want gays to serve openly in the military.

During last year's campaign, President Barack Obama indicated that he supported eventually repealing the law, but he has made no specific move to do so since taking office in January. The White House has said it won't stop the military from dismissing gays and lesbians who admit their sexuality.

Democrats who control Congress also are not in a hurry to end the policy, which was made law in 1993. Easing the outright ban on gays in the military caused political trouble for President Bill Clinton and Democratic lawmakers that year, and Obama and his congressional allies want to avoid an issue that would roil the public just as they are seeking support for health care and other initiatives.

A Democratic aide to the Senate Armed Services Committee called a review of the law "not a high priority" and said the panel will look at the issue sometime before the end of Obama's term _ but would not specify when. The aide spoke on condition of anonymity to speak freely about the committee's plans.

The Supreme Court's decision comes in the first few months of a year that gay rights advocates initially believed would bring the repeal of the law they view as discriminatory and unconstitutional.

But little evidence of action from the Obama administration and Congress has frustrated advocates who accused their usually allied Democratic leaders of selling out.

"Every moment that the administration and Congress delay repealing 'don't ask, don't tell,' our nation is robbed of brave men and women who would risk their lives to keep our country safe," Joe Solmonese, president of Human Rights Campaign, said after the court's denial.

"The time to repeal 'don't ask, don't tell' is now," Solmonese said.

Without comment, the nation's highest court denied a review of an appeal from former Army Capt. James Pietrangelo II, who was in the Vermont National Guard when he was discharged in 2004.

"I think this decision is an absolute travesty of justice and I think every judge on this court should be ashamed of themselves," said Pietrangelo, who served six years in the Army, seven years in the Vermont National Guard and fought in Iraq in 1991. "It's nothing short of rubber stamping legalized discrimination."

"The Supreme Court is not infallible, they get things wrong, and they got it wrong this time," added Pietrangelo, who now lives in Ohio.

In court papers, the government said a Boston-based appeals court ruled correctly when it threw out Pietrangelo's case because the policy is "rationally related to the government's legitimate interest in military discipline and cohesion."

At the Pentagon, spokesman Bryan Whitman said the military was merely following the law, which he said requires the Pentagon to "separate from the armed services members who engage in or attempt to engage in homosexual acts, state they are homosexual or bisexual, or marry or attempt to marry a person of the same biological sex."

The Supreme Court has never heard a case challenging the constitutionality of the 1993 law that was pushed by then-President Bill Clinton and adopted by Congress.

Senior Pentagon officials largely have shied away from discussing changes to the law, calling it a volatile topic for troops already stretched thin by ongoing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. A coalition of more than 1,000 retired military officers, including 47 four-star generals and admirals, recently warned Obama that overturning "don't ask, don't tell" could cause problems with recruiting and retaining troops.

Administration officials also point, privately, to lukewarm efforts on Capitol Hill to repeal the policy as a signal of the scant political will behind it.

House Armed Services Chairman Ike Skelton, D-Mo., supports the "don't ask, don't tell" policy, but is open to reviewing the law to see if it is "still appropriate for today's military," said spokeswoman Loren Dealy.

In an indication of the political tensions at stake, a Washington-based conservative Christian group that opposes same-sex marriage also weighed in Monday to praise the court decision.

"Military service is a privilege, not a right, and anything that detracts from the ability of our service personnel to fulfill their mission should be prohibited," said Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council and a Marine veteran.

A Quinnipiac University poll conducted in late April indicates a majority of American voters believe the law should be overturned. The poll found that 56 percent of 2,041 registered voters who were surveyed nationwide said that "don't ask, don't tell" should no longer be Pentagon policy.

Among voters who have relatives in the military, the number dipped slightly: Half believed the law should be overturned, while 43 percent said it should remain in place. The remaining 7 percent were undecided or did not answer, according to the Quinnipiac poll, which had a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 2.2 percentage points.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court refused on Monday to hear a legal challenge to the Pentagon's "don't ask, don't tell" policy, a decision that allows the Obama administration to continue its slow,...
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court refused on Monday to hear a legal challenge to the Pentagon's "don't ask, don't tell" policy, a decision that allows the Obama administration to continue its slow,...
Filed by Rachel Weiner  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 1,717
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (16 total)
11:54 PM on 07/02/2009
Obama deputy campaign manager abandons DOMA & DADT as priorities
http://www.americablog.com/2009/07/obama-deputy-campaign-manager-abandons.html

"After two weeks of the Obama White House reeling over the gay backlash caused by the anti-gay DOMA brief, which compared gay marriage to incest and pedophilia, we now have...

First, that the burden for doing anything pro-gay in the remaining three and a half years of the Obama administration is now shifted to Congress. Obama has no role whatsoever, and no power to influence anything, even though he's still the leader of the free world.

Second, the three big gay rights priorities that Congress should be focusing on do not even include what have organically become the community's top two priorities: repealing DOMA and Don't Ask Don't Tell. They're not even mentioned in the Obama deputy's essay."
10:01 AM on 06/09/2009
Obama is so behind the curve on DADT when 70% to 75% supports the issue that it only means 1 of 2 things
1) We are his Sister Souljah moment or
2) He really is a Muslim
11:45 PM on 06/08/2009
I think it's time for ALL Gay men, Lesbians, and straight people who believe in equality, and are currently serving in the armed forces to stand up and say they're Gay. That will put an end to this shizzit once and for all. I think our government needs their hand forced.
10:47 PM on 06/08/2009
Where are the veterans group on this issue?
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
Artemis34
"Women 4 the GOP" is like "Chickens 4 the KFC"
11:09 PM on 06/08/2009
Even people like Colin Powell are 'coming out' in favor of repealing DADT.
08:19 AM on 06/09/2009
Having Powell recant his former supplrt for DADT is better than a poke in the eye with a sharp stick, but what about large, old-line groups such as Vultures Fomenting War?
12:47 AM on 06/09/2009
the veterans group VoteVets.org are a co-sponsor of KnightsOut.org, the group who are working with congress and the military to have DADT repealed
10:33 PM on 06/08/2009
I served with gay people in the military and they served their country proudly and with honor. This is a leadership decision where homophobia lurks. It's not with the troops.
09:13 PM on 06/08/2009
Just announced on Rachel Maddow, (yeah I know not the greatest source, but she's funny)

DADT *HAS* the votes in Congress to be overturned, but is stalled in committee and likely to be shelved for the year
09:15 PM on 06/08/2009
So this is Obama's fault? Why arn't you protesting the congress?
09:26 PM on 06/08/2009
Nowhere in that statement did I say this was Obama's fault. This development has nothing to do with Obama.

and as far as protesting congress, as I've said several times already, if I was not bedridden, I WOULD be in DC protesting Congress
11:29 PM on 06/08/2009
Obama, as the commander-in-chief, has the ability to suspend implementation of dadt. When he became president, he inherited problems not of his making. ALL presidents do. But when you become THE man, those problems become yours to solve. DADT is HIS problem now. DOMA is HIS problem now. If you think we're not going to hold him accountable for the problems he asked to be responsible for, then you are a deluded fool.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
Artemis34
"Women 4 the GOP" is like "Chickens 4 the KFC"
09:51 PM on 06/08/2009
Write call your representative:

Please support: "the Military Readiness Enhancement Act of 2007, now awaiting a vote in the U.S. Congress.

Proposed by Rep. Marty Meehan (D-MA), this bill has one specific mission: "to amend title 10, United States Code, to enhance the readiness of the Armed Forces by replacing the current policy concerning homosexuality in the Armed Forces, referred to as 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell', with a policy of nondiscrimination on the basis of sexual orientation."
09:57 PM on 06/08/2009
Thank you, why RM didn't give people that tidbit of info is beyond me.
09:10 PM on 06/08/2009
Rachel nailed it on this issue just now! Concise, factual, and didn't without letting anyone off the hook.
09:14 PM on 06/08/2009
LOL GMTA, but I got the feeling the rep said DADT was dead in committee? Did I misread that?
09:32 PM on 06/08/2009
I think you're right that is was dead in committee for now but that it she and her guest agreed it could be up again.
09:16 PM on 06/08/2009
She blamed Obama. dumb
10:08 PM on 06/08/2009
Just curious...in the impossible event that BO supported a law saying all gays should be put in jail for engaging in homosexual activity, would you then be able to criticize him? Is there anything on this issue that the POTUS could say or do that you could possibly conceive of criticizing him on??????

I think you're exhuberance of this POTUS and disdane for people pushing for civil rights is clouding your rationale.

Nothing barring silence from gays and their supporters would satisfy you.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
cbates
08:40 PM on 06/08/2009
Seems as though there is misgivings concerning the SCOTUS ruling on DADT. Peoples have been in bondage and turmoil for centuries. Jews are somewhat successful people after bondage.
My heart bleeds when I think of the middle passage where more African Americans died in transient than Jews did in the death camps. I also reflect on the Civil Rights marches most recently Katrina and it to makes me cry. I am also overwhelmed when I see and hear the story of Native Americans being slaughtered and made to walk thousands of miles in the winter onto reservations where all dignity was stripped and they are now treated as a nation within a nation.
In recent years I started hoping especially after Desert Storm that the population would see us as functional human beings that wanted and did support this society and yet the answer from the public was always no you are not wanted. I had a White guy who had married African American woman say he preferred to be in Iraq than in this country married to a Black woman because of their reception in public. For me their are too many other battle than what you do i n your bedroom with whom. The President I assure you hear you and will plan a way for you to do what you want him to do. We AA and NA and others will be here exposed just because that the nature of the beast; it sees color.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
Artemis34
"Women 4 the GOP" is like "Chickens 4 the KFC"
09:08 PM on 06/08/2009
This probably was not "the" case.

And certainly is not "our" court.

It may have set a bad precedent that we actually don't want.

Best thing the president can do is get the Pentagon to lead the repeal of DADT.

The generals and admirals don't have to run for re-election.

And there is a legitimate military need, a national security need, for these people. If the Pentagon says "We must have them" then congress and the president can say they are just supporting the Pentagon.

And the Pentagon should say it.

Many already actually think it and some are saying publicly. But even the ones that have not didn't have any problem dancing to Bush's tune, so they should have not problem dancing for the new Commander-in-chief either.
08:35 PM on 06/08/2009
Last month on NPR, Obama's senior advisor David Axelrod was asked how involved he was in the naming of Obama's dog, Bo. He said he only got called in for the final three names. “One was Miss California,” Axelrod joked.
Now that the President has gone back on his word on DADT and seems to be more conservative on this issue than Miss California, doesn't it makes you wonder what the third choice for Bo's name was?
08:37 PM on 06/08/2009
Harvey.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
cbates
08:10 PM on 06/08/2009
The other option to DADT is to not serve.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
Artemis34
"Women 4 the GOP" is like "Chickens 4 the KFC"
08:19 PM on 06/08/2009
More troop losses! That is the LAST thing we need when we're fighting two wars!
08:46 PM on 06/08/2009
Those on the right love to say that actions have consequences...well, the refusal of self-respecting non-heterosexuals to go into the military would be a well-deserved consequence of the military & Government's refusal to do away with DADT, as far as I'm concerned. Loyalty is a two-way street.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
sandals
07:40 PM on 06/08/2009
Look this has nothing to do with "Man crushing" This is an important issue but I to agree that
our economy should be the top priority.
He has only been in office for 140 days and we should be praising him for the things he has gotten done.
I believe that within this year he will have this repealed.
I do have hope, I believe the law is wrong when people are willing to serve our country we shouldn't let this stand in their way.
I have a lot of gay friends, and I don't see them screaming about this.
The homophobic s are out and crazier than ever.
07:49 PM on 06/08/2009
Maybe you'll answer this for me, because no one else has been willing...

What exactly is the Obama administration and Congress supposed to be doing which would prevent them tackling this issue, that they aren't already doing or planning on doing? It seems to me the engine has already started on Health Care, The Economy is just waiting for people to contribute now that government has done its job, so really, what more can they do that they haven't already done, which would be in the way of them moving on this issue?
07:53 PM on 06/08/2009
Place do you see how the Pres is being attacked everywhere? It is a political minefield.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jcwtts1
Elections have consequences
08:12 PM on 06/08/2009
Wow, ok, Obama is running two wars, he is setting a progressive agenda on social issues, picking a supreme court justice, running the country and even though you think the economy is on auto pilot it isn't. All of the things I just mentioned use political capital. They do not come for free. Obama has a finite amount of this capital and there are only so many things he can do at once. He expended an enormous amount on the stim bill. It has started working, just starting, and that is going to replenish his capital but if you argue that capital is 100 pts, he spent 50 on the stim, 20, on the budget, 20 on the war and 10 on everything else. As things keep working well more capital will return. But there is a constant attrition to the capital. He loses more of it as time goes by so the total isn't a 100 any more it is 90, and in October it will probably 70, and next year it will max out at 40. Do you see what I am saying. You are asking him to dump what will take 100 pts of capital into a fight that will either damage him for the rest of this first term, or in which he will lose and is total cap will drop by fifty percent. He won't do it until his cap and the public pressure is equalized.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
Steamboater
Forget hope. Agitate.
08:06 PM on 06/08/2009
"He has only been in office for 140 days ... "

We hear this same tired excuse all the time by those who's heart is in the right place but who also have rights that we don't. Today it's 140 days, 6 months from it will be etc etc. Meanwhile Gays in the military are losing and will lose their status and be thrown out, and all the while we had or at least thought we had a president who gave a damn but he didn't fool some us with his stand against marriage. Civil Unions are NOT marriage with all the perks that come with it.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jcwtts1
Elections have consequences
08:18 PM on 06/08/2009
When Obama speaks of civil unions he is speaking of a federal equivalency. The conflation of civil union with marriage. Not a separate law about civil unions. He speaks of the identical rights, supported by the weight of the federal government.

J
photo
SILVANUS
Moving to Italy indefinitely. God Bless All.
07:38 PM on 06/08/2009
The Supremes Suck.
07:40 PM on 06/08/2009
they are only responding to the arguments given by obama
07:54 PM on 06/08/2009
so this is Obama's fault?
07:27 PM on 06/08/2009
I am for Obama's policy to slow-roll this. He respects all the categories of people, and can be trusted to act in the Natiional interest.

I would like him to go on to more pressing matters--just about anything else on his tremendous plate of urgent issues. This is not urgent.
07:36 PM on 06/08/2009
Who ever indicated he was "slow-rolling" repealing DADT, much less repealing it altogether?
07:37 PM on 06/08/2009
Dear Alex,

It is not customay for any skilled politician to point out that he or she is slow-rolling something. Make sense, eh?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jcwtts1
Elections have consequences
08:28 PM on 06/08/2009
He put it into review. He has met with the cabinet level people and specifically asked DADT to be put into review, just as Harry Truman did with integrating the military in the late 40s.

J
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
Steamboater
Forget hope. Agitate.
08:38 PM on 06/08/2009
Obama trusted? Not after his "slow-rolling" our rights. Maybe you have time but a lot of us don't. Minorites are always told to wait for a seat at the table and while they wait others are enjoying a delicious meal and the main course passes those waiting by. Sorry, but no more after-dinner mints for us.
07:26 PM on 06/08/2009
I see all the apologist fanbois of Obama are still man crushing on him
07:45 PM on 06/08/2009
Lady, you are saying more than u should wanna reveal, eh?