iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' Enforcement Must Be Halted, Federal Judge Rules

Dont Ask Dont Tell

JULIE WATSON   10/12/10 10:39 PM ET   AP

SAN DIEGO — A federal judge ordered the military Tuesday to immediately stop enforcing its ban on openly gay troops, bringing the 17-year "don't ask, don't tell" policy closer than it has ever been to being abolished.

Justice Department attorneys have 60 days to appeal the injunction but did not say what their next step would be.

President Barack Obama has backed a Democratic effort in Congress to repeal the law, rather than in an executive order or in court.

But U.S. District Judge Virginia Phillips' injunction leaves the administration with a choice: Continue defending a law it opposes with an appeal, or do nothing, let the policy be overturned, and add an explosive issue to a midterm election with Republicans poised to make major gains.

Department of Justice and Pentagon officials were reviewing the judge's decision and said they had no immediate comment.

"The whole thing has become a giant game of hot potato," said Diane H. Mazur, a legal expert at the Palm Center, a think tank at the University of California at Santa Barbara that supports a repeal. "There isn't anyone who wants to be responsible, it seems, for actually ending this policy.

"The potato has been passed around so many times that I think the grown-up in the room is going to be the federal courts."

A federal judge in Tacoma, Wash., ruled in a different case last month that a decorated flight nurse discharged from the Air Force for being gay should be given her job back.

Phillips, based in Riverside, Calif., issued a landmark ruling on Sept. 9, declaring the policy unconstitutional and asked both sides to give her input about an injunction. The judge said the policy violates due process rights, freedom of speech and the right to petition the government for redress of grievances guaranteed by the First Amendment.

Gay rights groups hailed Phillips' latest move, crediting her with what the administration and Washington have not been able to do.

"For a single federal judge to tell the government to stop enforcing this policy worldwide, this afternoon, with no time to think about it or plan for it, is almost unprecedented," said Richard Socarides, a former Clinton White House adviser on gay rights.

"This judge was sure. There was nothing in her mind that could justify this even for one more day, one more hour."

Gay rights advocates, however, tempered their celebrations, warning service members to avoid revealing their sexuality for fear that the injunction could be tossed out during an appeal and they would be left open to being discharged.

If the government does not appeal, the injunction cannot be reversed and would remain in effect. If it does, it can seek a temporary freeze, or stay, of her ruling. An appeal would go to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit. Either side could then take it to the U.S. Supreme Court.

The Pentagon did not immediately comment, and a Justice Department spokeswoman said the government was reviewing the decision. Meanwhile, a group of 19 Democrat senators signed a letter sent to U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder urging him to let the injunction stand.

A "don't ask, don't tell" supporter said Phillips overstepped her bounds.

"The judge ignored the evidence to impose her ill-informed and biased opinion on our military, endangering morale, health and security of our military at a time of war," said Wendy Wright, president of Concerned Women for America, a public policy group.

Wright said Phillips should have let Congress continue to investigate the impact of the repeal.

Phillips' order goes into effect immediately, said Dan Woods, the attorney who represented the Log Cabin Republicans, the gay rights group that filed the lawsuit in 2004 to stop the ban's enforcement.

The group says more than 13,500 service members have been fired under the Clinton administration-era policy, which prohibits the military from asking about the sexual orientation of service members but bans those who are openly gay.

Under the 1993 policy, service men and women who acknowledge being gay or are discovered engaging in homosexual activity, including in their own homes off base, are subject to discharge.

Phillips' ruling also ordered the government to suspend and discontinue all pending discharge proceedings and investigations.

Government attorneys had warned Phillips that such an abrupt change from an injunction might harm military operations during wartime. They had asked Phillips to limit her ruling to the 19,000 members of the Log Cabin Republicans, which includes current and former military service members.

The Justice Department attorneys also said Congress should decide the issue – not the court.

Phillips disagreed, saying the policy doesn't help military readiness and instead has a "direct and deleterious effect" on the armed services by hurting recruiting when the country is at war and requiring the discharge of service members with critical skills and training.

"Furthermore, there is no adequate remedy at law to prevent the continued violation of servicemembers' rights or to compensate them for violation of their rights," Phillips said in her order.

Obama opposed "don't ask, don't tell" in the 2008 presidential campaign and pledged to work for its repeal.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates, a Republican, and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Mike Mullen, the military's top uniformed officer, have both said they support lifting the ban. But Gates and Mullen also have warned that they would prefer to move slowly.

Gates has ordered a sweeping study due Dec. 1 that includes a survey of troops and their families.

The president agreed to the Pentagon study but also worked with Democrats to write a bill that would have lifted the ban, pending completion of the Defense Department review and certification from the military that troop morale wouldn't suffer.

That legislation passed the House but was blocked in the Senate by Republicans.

Gates has said the purpose of his study isn't to determine whether to change the law – something he says is probably inevitable but up for Congress to decide. Instead, the study is intended to determine how to lift the ban without causing serious disruption during wartime.

If Democrats lose seats in the upcoming elections, repealing the ban could prove even more difficult – if not impossible – next year.

"'Don't ask, don't tell,' as of today at least, is done, and the government is going to have to do something now to resurrect it," Woods said of the Log Cabin Republicans. "Once and for all this failed policy is stopped. Fortunately, now we hope all Americans who wish to serve their country can."

___

Associated Press writer Anne Flaherty in Washington contributed to this report.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
SAN DIEGO — A federal judge ordered the military Tuesday to immediately stop enforcing its ban on openly gay troops, bringing the 17-year "don't ask, don't tell" policy closer than it has ever b...
SAN DIEGO — A federal judge ordered the military Tuesday to immediately stop enforcing its ban on openly gay troops, bringing the 17-year "don't ask, don't tell" policy closer than it has ever b...
Filed by Nick Wing  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 5,874
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (94 total)
photo
emmanuel goldstein
Have you had your two minutes today?
05:32 PM on 10/14/2010
The misinformation "I was an Obama supporter, now I'm not" phonies are out in mass for this one, don't buy the hype, there is good reason they are appealing this.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
05:43 PM on 10/13/2010
Just as expected, they are going to appeal.

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/124073-white-house-time-is-ticking-on-dont-ask-dont-tell
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
talkstocoyotes
07:26 PM on 10/14/2010
That's the White House "fierce advocate" for ya. All hot air and no balloon, as usual.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Davwbaird
Brothers and sisters of the same mother
05:22 PM on 10/13/2010
These are not boring times.
03:20 PM on 10/13/2010
Why are my comments being deleted? I did not use profanity, nor did I use any slurs or epithets toward anybody.
photo
emmanuel goldstein
Have you had your two minutes today?
05:33 PM on 10/14/2010
Maybe they were just lies, or maybe it was random. Sometimes comments just disappear for "magical" reasons.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
Musnt Grumble
Feelings of an almost human nature.
09:42 AM on 10/22/2010
Join the club. Someone has a trigger happy delete button on HP.
02:22 PM on 10/13/2010
This is VERY easy. Since there is separation of church and state, and the "state" runs the military, simply extend "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" to all facets of religion. Talk about God? You're out. Carry a Bible? You're out. Say you're Christian? You're out. Extending the SAME policy to religion (which is very much a "choice") simply creates equitability.
01:13 PM on 10/13/2010
I hear people talking about why DADT shouldn't be repealed. It's clear that a lot of them have never served in the military themselves. They don't have the stones. Well here's a little suggestion to those people. If you don't have the intestinal fortitude to join the military & serve your country, then YOU don't have the right to tell the people protecting your @$$ on a daily basis how they have to live & what they can or can't talk about. PERIOD.

You whiners sit back from the comfort of your little arm chair & attack soldiers who are laying their lives on the line FOR YOU, but you can't be bothered to actually serve your country yourself. You people are a frikkin' joke. You strut around demanding that we listen to your bigoted BS like you're some privileged primadonna who should automatically be heard just because you've deigned to open your pie-hole.

I'm ex-military & I can honestly say that I'd rather have a platoon's worth of openly gay soldiers that I know I can trust with my life & will fight by my side, than a whole battalion's worth of you mewling little pus-bags who are more concerned with if a soldier is gay & whether or not they are talking about it.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
02:27 PM on 10/14/2010
Let me start by saying I support ending DADT. With that said, I completely disagree with your post. Being in the military or even former military doesnt make your opinion carry any more weight than anyone elses, if all people are truely equal. Like most military people I have know you are conceited , show nothing but contempt for those who did not choose to serve, calling them gutless and lazy, as if you are better than everyone else for serving in the military. This line of thinking is dangerous and no less bigotted than that which you are complaining about.

To sum it up, thank you for your service, but F you.
04:49 PM on 10/14/2010
"Like most military people I have know you are conceited , show nothing but contempt for those who did not choose to serve, calling them gutless and lazy, as if you are better than everyone else for serving in the military."

First off, it's not that I "show nothing but contempt for those who did not choose to serve". I DO have a problem with those that didn't serve but think they have the right to tell the people who ARE serving how they have to live their life & who they can or can't tell about their relationships.

Secondly, show me where I said that my opinion carries any more weight than anyone else's. Also show me where I said anything about being better than everyone else because I served in the military.

Nowhere did I say that everyone who never served in the military was gutless & lazy, that was YOUR misstatement. I was referring to the people who didn't serve but who think they can dictate how soldiers have to live their lives while serving.

Nowhere did I say that I was any better than anyone else or that my opinion was worth more. Again, that was YOUR misstatement.

The only bigoted thinking I see here is yours.

Maybe you should brush up on your reading & comprehension skills before you go shooting your mouth off, junior.

Thanking me for my service before telling me "F you" is downright juvenile & disingenuous.
05:12 PM on 10/14/2010
Oh, and let's get one more thing straight, junior.

You don't know me at all, so don't try & lump me in with your "Like most military people I have know you are conceited..."

In fact I doubt that you actually "know" many military people at all.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
talkstocoyotes
07:28 PM on 10/14/2010
"You whiners sit back from the comfort of your little arm chair & attack soldiers who are laying their lives on the line FOR YOU,"

Our soldiers haven't been layng their lives on the line for one damn thing other than the profits of military contractors for the past six decades.
07:54 PM on 10/14/2010
So the soldiers are to blame for who they are ordered to go to war with?

Fact IS, they're still laying their lives on the line. But THEY don't get a choice of who to fight, they just get to follow orders.
12:46 PM on 10/13/2010
according to thier reasoning for appealing DOMA, (the federal govt has to appeal any challenge to federal law) They will appeal DADT.

They dont have to appeal challenges to federal law, they haven't always done so, one reason they have choosen not to was that theybelieved the law to be unconstitutional. So, does that mean they find DOMA constitutional?
12:47 PM on 10/13/2010
appealing the challange to DOMA. sorry.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
AbeMartin
The best person fer a job is never a candidate
12:26 PM on 10/13/2010
Don’t ask/Don’t Tell, along with the segregation of Blacks from the whites in service is one of the stupidest most corrosive military policies ever enacted. How many hundreds of patriotic, highly trained and hugely productive men and women had their careers ended after being outed by homophobic (and probably closeted) comrades?

Gays and lesbians enlist for the same reasons that straights do. They enlist to serve their country’s needs, provide for its defense from very nasty, very determined and very well-financed enemies. They enlist to have a meaningful career and to take care of family members.
Neither they nor straights enlist because they believe that in so doing they will enjoy a license to cruise barracks, showers, commissaries, PX’s, clubs to lure innocents into the “gay lifestyle.”
The debate prolonged the anxiety of thousands of honorable gay and lesbians who serve in all branches and at all ranks in the Armed Services. And it provided an opportunity for those who have never served in the military along with veterans of questionable accomplishment, such as Senator John (Air Crash Test Dummy) McCain to demonstrate their intolerance as they riled the ignorant.
President Obama as Commander-In-Chief, could have ordered ending discrimination on the base of sexual preference, just as Truman ordered racial segregation in all service branches to end more than sixty years ago. He did not. Those targeting homosexuals should be court-martialed, and, if convicted, dishonorably discharged, with loss of rank. Thankfully, Judge Phillips did.
12:16 PM on 10/13/2010
So what they are saying is as of this moment, the "Don't ask Don't tell" is lifted, but it is not permanent? If so then I guess it does pose a problem later if it should be placed back on and those who became open and comfortable for the first time in a long time because they are sitting ducks and will be discharged one by one if not in a massive swarm. Lets just hope it doesn't become an issue as far as being taken away for good.
photo
Euterpe360
I'm just a little bi-partisan
12:12 PM on 10/13/2010
This is awesome, but I do think this decision is one that needs to be made the federal government. At the very least by a higher court.

Constitutionally I'm not a fan of this move. Persoanlly is an entirely different matter :P
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
MrNCN
Lean not upon your own understanding...
12:03 PM on 10/13/2010
"This judge was sure. There was nothing in her mind that could justify this even for one more day, one more hour."

BINGO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Was she supposed to realize that this is completely and totally wrong on every single level and thensuggest that we should change it someday maybe?

NOPE! This is wrong and it needs to be changed RIGHT NOW.
photo
emmanuel goldstein
Have you had your two minutes today?
05:37 PM on 10/14/2010
Yes, end it now, but not the way they are trying. There are many avenues to ending DADT, this is a bad one.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
MrNCN
Lean not upon your own understanding...
08:46 AM on 10/15/2010
I agree that there are several avenues and, quite frankly, I am of the El-Hajj Malik El-Shabazz mindet "By Any Means Necessary" (on this one)
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Wizer
No more tiny coffins
10:38 AM on 10/13/2010
To the people here who are screaming "activist judge" (just like rush and glen told you to go out and do): Go actually READ the constitution. That is the role of the federal court system, just because citizens vote away rights or congress passes unconstitutional laws, doesn't mean we have to keep these laws on the books. The purpose of the judiciary is to review the law using the US Constitution as the basis. Judge Phillips ordered the injunction because the policy violates due process rights, freedom of speech and the right to petition the government for redress of grievances guaranteed by the First Amendment.

BTW: Did you scream "activist court" when SCOTUS granted personhood to corporations? I think you probably fell into rw cheering on that one and that law, as we can see in this election cycle, has the potential to overthrow american democracy. Where's your outrage over that activist court?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
MamacitaOfLove
Micro-bio curious
11:06 AM on 10/13/2010
FANNED.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
MrNCN
Lean not upon your own understanding...
12:15 PM on 10/13/2010
Marbury v Madison settled this one almost 200 years ago so, the term "Activist Judges" is truly a silly silly label that the right likes to trot out anytime the courts decide something they don't agree with.

F&F
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
Sweet Leaf
We have the best Government money can buy -M.Twain
10:14 AM on 10/13/2010
“You don't have to be straight to be in the military; you just have to be able to shoot straight.”

-Barry Goldwater
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Wizer
No more tiny coffins
10:40 AM on 10/13/2010
And goldwater has a gay grandson, I often remind people but yesterday someone told me, on these boards, that having a gay grandson influenced his thoughts and opinions about gay people. Good for goldwater for loving his grandson and throwing out the common rw thinking points about gay people.
12:17 PM on 10/13/2010
Whether people like it or not, Gay People are Family. We are the product of Heterosexual Sex. We didn't fall out of the sky! If you shake every Family Tree hard enough, a few Gay folks will fall out, whether you believe it or not. Denying this reality will not protect those fears some seen to have for the "Forbidden Fruit"(no pun intended).
So all this hoodoo meant to berate LGBT Folks doesn't hold much weight other than to reinforce people's fears.
There is no Monster under the Bed!
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
AbeMartin
The best person fer a job is never a candidate
12:31 PM on 10/13/2010
Great quote by an American leader with whom I often disagreed but who I almost always respected.
It is highly discouraging to know that he, Ronald Reagan, William F. Buckley and many other thoughtful but ultimately pragmatic Conservatives would be reviled now in America by Limbaugh, Colter, Malkin, Hannity, Beck and Bachmann and their ilk.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Samuel Nnadi
Detail Oriented
09:49 AM on 10/13/2010
Judge Virginia Phillips is an activist Judge known for taking laws into her own hand. She want to undo the act of Congress. Pentagon will not adhere to the ruling. This ruling will be tossed out on appeal. Don't ask don't tell policy will continue until Congress wade in.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jason N
Proud Firebagger Lefty
09:59 AM on 10/13/2010
"She want to undo the act of Congress."

That's a judge's JOB when the act is unconstitutional, which even DADT's most ardent supporters are prone to agree with.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Wizer
No more tiny coffins
10:37 AM on 10/13/2010
Go actually READ the constitution. That is the role of the federal court system, just because citizens vote away rights or congress passes unconstitutional laws, doesn't mean we have to keep these laws on the books. The purpose of the judiciary is to review the law using the US Constitution as the basis. Judge Phillips ordered the injunction because the policy violates due process rights, freedom of speech and the right to petition the government for redress of grievances guaranteed by the First Amendment.

BTW: Did you scream "activist court" when SCOTUS granted personhood to corporations? I think you probably fell into rw cheering on that one and that law, as we can see in this election cycle, has the potential to overthrow american democracy. Where's your outrage over that activist court?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mandymarleyandme
10:42 AM on 10/13/2010
Judicial Review is not in the constitution. Was not established until Marbury v. Madison. But I agree with your general, overall point.
Paulo1
Thanks for reading, (even if you disagree)
09:39 AM on 10/13/2010
Obama will appeal, not because he has to but because it is in keeping with his total sell out of every progressive ideal he campaigned on.

He bailed on War Crimes, wouldn't fight for universal health care, defended Bush's power grabs and the thrashing of the Constitution and did a total epic fail on financial reform. He has repeatedly had his DOJ file some of the most homophobic briefs in history and still claims to be our "fierce advocate". Well with advocates like him we don't exactly need to fear a Republican Congress, they certainly can't be worse for Progressives and gays than Obama.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
NWBrunette
Blessed Girl
11:28 AM on 10/13/2010
I'm certain the repubs can be worse, far worse (we just got over eight years of the worst presidency ever, don't forget). But clearly Obama is no "fierce advocate", not by a long shot..
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
talkstocoyotes
07:33 PM on 10/14/2010
Alal that should have been evident in 2008 but any attempts to point that out were shouted down.