iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' Temporarily Upheld By Appeals Court

Dont Ask Dont Tell

LISA LEFF   10/20/10 11:46 PM ET   AP

SAN FRANCISCO — A federal appeals court on Wednesday temporarily granted the U.S. 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 the "don't ask, don't tell" policy 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.

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, however, 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 Barack 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.

The 1993 "don't ask, don't tell" rule says gays may serve but only if they keep secret their sexual orientation.

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 Ronald Reagan, and William A. Fletcher, an appointee of President Bill Clinton.

__

Associated Press writers Julie Watson in San Diego, and Anne Flaherty in Washington, D.C., contributed to this report.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
SAN FRANCISCO — A federal appeals court on Wednesday temporarily granted the U.S. government's request for a freeze on a judge's order requiring the military to allow openly gay troops. A three...
SAN FRANCISCO — A federal appeals court on Wednesday temporarily granted the U.S. government's request for a freeze on a judge's order requiring the military to allow openly gay troops. A three...
Filed by Whitney Snyder  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 5,428
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (73 total)
02:23 AM on 10/26/2010
I feel that gays should be able to represent their sexual orientations if they please. It's constitutional to have freedom of speech and to have their own individual rights. I also read an article about the Hawaii governor who voted against this act because he had a first hand experience of soldiers getting money for agreeing to re enlist, they saying that they were gay to get out of the war once times were getting tough. To ensure this won't happen, you have to just allow those people to be open and free with what they are. It just seems to complicate things when you have to put so many rules on a certain group of people, and at this time, gays are being mistreated. They are people too... Why should we be allowed to fall in love and have a marriage and kids, if others can't just because they are gay? That seems unfair.
12:30 AM on 10/25/2010
I disagree with dont ask dont tell because being gay is not a shameful thing and people who are gay deserve the same respect. It should be ok for people to share their sexual orientation without breaking a rule or being ridiculed.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
fiibias
good fame but by virtue
10:00 PM on 10/24/2010
Alibi for ruler.Exis to deep tension. As managers green nightmare certified by his worst nightmare to awke person:somewhere,somehowe allready some but determine before opening night exactly sum of not at all:INTELLECTAL PROPERTY! Thats for certainty real and non plus insides.
06:30 PM on 10/22/2010
Obama could temporarily let gays serve while waiting for the courts or Congress to act by using his stop-loss power, which was explicitly granted by Congress in 1984 to override military discharges if troops are needed.

Stop-loss authority is a statutory authority enacted by Congress. It gives the president authority to suspend any law that involves the discharge of service members. In times of national emergency there might be lots of reasons.

Given all the accounts of valuable servicemen and servicewomen, such as Arabic translators, being discharged under DADT, it would seem a fairly straightforward case for Obama to make. That would buy a couple of years for Congress to act or the current legal challenge to reach the Supreme Court.

But he chooses not to act. Obama makes a choice.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
bigdaddyvike
left and rightly so...
07:32 PM on 10/21/2010
So, let me get this straight- appeals freezes the ruling, DADT goes back to go, SCOTUS eventually gets it (and you know how that turns out) and it all gets kicked under the rug for another 15 years. Yep.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Joe Krumbach
We are the children of an alien experiment.
06:37 PM on 10/21/2010
Yeah President Obama!!! You did exactly the opposite of what you said you would do.

Thanks for selling out, we appreciate it!!

For someone with a law degree, you don't seem to grasp the concept of "unconstitutional" very well.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
callinguonit
Did I Miss the GOP comeback?
11:44 PM on 10/21/2010
He is following the constitution. The DOJ should challenge a lower courts ruling against a Federal Law.
This will eventually end up in front of the SCOTUS. where it will be struck down as unconstitutional.
If the DOJ let the ruling stand Gays could openly serve until the next administration. Mccain and the Republicans have already said they will enforce it..If they have been serving openly, then they would be "sitting ducks".
This way it can be ended once and for all.
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
MCWAY
10:32 AM on 10/22/2010
Not necessarily!! You're assuming the 9th will uphold Phillips' ruling. That ain't etched in stone, even as liberal as the 9th has been in the past. With three other Appeals Courts (1st, 2nd, and 4th) upholding DADT, there's a good chance that Phillips' ruling gets reversed.

And, if that happens and the Supreme Court doens't bother taking the case, that's the ball game (as far as the courts are concerned).
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
NeoConsAreFinished
Fight the Ah mer I cun talibanned
06:14 PM on 10/21/2010
Ok armchair lawyers here is the best explanation yet.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/10/21/dadt-conflict-explained-w_n_771035.html
My opinion is still that the admin could have let this go and seen DADT die right now.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
callinguonit
Did I Miss the GOP comeback?
06:34 PM on 10/21/2010
He could temporarily end...
But Don't Ask Don't Tell is a law. This law was deemed constitutional.
That's why the DOJ is supposed to challenge the temporary banning. However, it can be ended permanently by Congress repealing it.
This proves that Obama is set to his agenda and the promise that it would end permanently.
He could have waited until after the elections.....but he wants to hedge his bets...
if the elections outcome goes Republican,,...I'm willing to bet that the Dems who were hesitant to come out full force in support will decide they have nothing to lose and it will be repealed in Lame Duck”
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
NeoConsAreFinished
Fight the Ah mer I cun talibanned
11:45 PM on 10/21/2010
calling that is just an excuse.
The congress will not end DADT. Ill put money on it.
You think a LAME DUCK session means that the votes suddenly appear out of nowhere?
The dems couldnt repeal it yesterday. What makes you think after the elections they can repeal it?
If it goes to the SC then the conservative radical judges will not end DADT.
So the best thing is a judges ruling no matter how temporary it is.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
SPQR1052
04:07 PM on 10/21/2010
Hop over to the "Dan Choi Won't Vote For Obama After Administration's 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' Actions (VIDEO)" thread. It's on LOCKDOWN. 17 comments 72 comments pending. I believe someone's 15 mins might be up. Additionally, last time I checked and I am a former officer, disrespecting the CiC by an enlisted member of the militray was or is grounds for dismissal. SEE McCrystal and MacArthur. To my knowledge LT. Choi did re-enlist yesterday.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Doug Watt
Not ready for 2012
09:26 PM on 10/21/2010
Wow, I usually admire your posts but this one is a reach. Dam Choi is a hero, a great American who speaks for millions of us.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
callinguonit
Did I Miss the GOP comeback?
11:47 PM on 10/21/2010
Yeah, but Choi has but his self in an awful position. If he had only waited to see what Obama's plan was...Obama has appointed civilians to decide the DADT cases. They would be much more careful in its implementation. Which will be temporary. Because the DOJ is going to force this to go the SCOTUS if Congress cannot repeal it.
Obama realizes that the control of Congress is in danger. This is the best route to follow for DADT
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
SPQR1052
11:08 AM on 10/22/2010
You lie and I know your tactic - won't work on my buddy. Former special forces officer, tv newsproducer and teacher. I know your kind. It ain't my first time at te rodeo.

LT Dan ain't a hero in my book nor could or would someone like him ever be.

http://twitpic.com/2o4pyd

Ask yourself how many WEST POINT graduates disrepsect command.

If from VMI or West Point we don't roll that way.
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
MCWAY
10:37 AM on 10/22/2010
No he didn't. He applied for enlistment and was warned (as were others) that, if DADT get reinstated, his application might get thrown out.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
SPQR1052
11:09 AM on 10/22/2010
As it ought be. An ARTICLE 88 is where he's head if he don't loose the halo.

Ask yourself how many WEST POINT graduates disrepsect command.

If from VMI or West Point we don't roll that way.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
toldyeso
03:33 PM on 10/21/2010
t I have had it with the never ending bull on this fight to end DADT. I’m sick of our “Fierce Blabbocate” who promised he’d end DADT starting the day he took office. Since then he’s stalled, called for myriad “studies” and “surveys”. His administration defended DADT repeatedly and even as it was struck down as unconstitutional his administration went to court to keep it in place. Obama is not, and never has been, an ally to LGBT people.

Apparently it’s all about how this affects the straight soldiers, their spouses, their high-school prom dates and their pets. We’re supposed to believe that military professionals who can take on enemies with guns and bombs can’t tolerate the idea that the person next to them has Teh Gay.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
SPQR1052
04:09 PM on 10/21/2010
Hate to point this out to you but Truman issued a 2 year study pior to intergrating the troops.
You really ought lear some history and if you think HILLARY is better vote for her in 2012. Good luck with that dream.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
toldyeso
04:28 PM on 10/21/2010
Look at all the Royalists coming here playing Obama Apologist Bingo!

http://new s.lavender liberal.co m/2009/06/ 20/obama-a pologist-b ingo/”
04:55 PM on 10/21/2010
Hate to point this out to you, but the military has known for 17 years this was coming. If they weren't prepared, tough.
03:15 PM on 10/21/2010
I really feel bad for the many Americans that voted for Obama and expected this fantastic "change" he promised. Come on! The guy is an opportunist and simply used many American's hopes and dreams as a stepping stone while at the same time managed to divide this country more than any president in history. Maybe now more Americans will see him as he really is: A politician that gives a good speech when using a teleprompter. Nothing more~
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
forte88
03:45 PM on 10/21/2010
Despite his faults, he's still 100x better than McCain and Palin would have been no matter how you spin it.
03:47 PM on 10/21/2010
Ha!! A Liberal that still believes in Obama!! What a shock~
photo
armed patriot
Rabble Rouser Extraordinaire
05:30 PM on 10/21/2010
Is that the new 2012 Obama bumper sticker?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
NeoConsAreFinished
Fight the Ah mer I cun talibanned
06:17 PM on 10/21/2010
LOL rightis. No one expected miracles. Stop listening to Faux.
He is and always was a centrist at best.
We only want more of a progressive.
I still support him as the choices the right offers are utter lunacy at best.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dcbarton
03:06 PM on 10/21/2010
Exactly what would ending DADT accomplish? Allowing gays and lesbians into the military? They can already join, they just have to keep their sexuality to themselves(since their sexuality won't make them better fighters it should be kept private). Will it make people accept them in the military? No. In the military, young men and women living a squadbays and sharing community showers are not going to be willing to share those squadbays and showers with openly gay people. Will it allow gays and lesbians to have sex in the barracks? No, that is banned for straights, too.

Ending DADT will accomplish nothing, but it will drive a wedge into the military and destroy unit coehesion.
03:18 PM on 10/21/2010
I tend to agree with you. Obama promised to end DADT to gain the gay vote in this country. Now that he is President, he doesn't need them anymore. If I were gay, THAT is what I would be mad about....being used and lied to by a politician that speaks great off of a teleprompter~
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
forte88
03:48 PM on 10/21/2010
Yes, I can see how upset you conservatives are about DADT. Do you think gays and lesbians will now start voting republican? Uhh.. don't think so! I know you wish they would just not vote.. but,, sorry. they do, and they will, and they will keep fighting against your conservative ideals.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
NeoConsAreFinished
Fight the Ah mer I cun talibanned
06:21 PM on 10/21/2010
dcbarton and Rightis might make a cute couple dont you all think?

Their fear of the gay is telling.
In my experience those that fear the gay have their own sexual ID issues.
I wonder if the 2 of them are those people?
Do you 2 hide in the closet?
Do you spend an inordinate amount of time thinking about the sex lives of gay people?
I suspect you are both gay and selfhating.
Come out of the closet and be happy.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
Musnt Grumble
Feelings of an almost human nature.
08:40 PM on 11/18/2010
The "accomplishment" of ending DADT will be the end of unjust discharges of gay and lesbian service people. Is that really difficult to understand? Your regurgitated, robot-like "it will destroy unit cohesion" is completely unfounded and has absolutely no foundation. The burden of proof is on those who wish to keep DADT in place... good luck with that.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jcwtts1
Elections have consequences
02:28 PM on 10/21/2010
I am heartbroken about Pat Murphy. Anyone who has read me on HP over the last 18 months knows that I have been critical of the LGBT communities response to Murphy's walking of DADT through the house and senate. I warned everyone when he announced he wanted to do it that he was going to be a target. I warned everyone that the LGBT community had a chance to put up or shut up with this specific race, that Murphy, a straight war hero who went to one of the service academies and wrote his senior thesis on the repeal of DADT was a perfect champion for this cause. And he was also a perfect test case for the political muscle of the LGBT community. I rang the alarm when he was getting out raised by his opponent and I rang it this summer when he was getting out spent. If backing LGBT causes gets you thrown out of congress the LGBT community is going to lose people who wish to do the right thing. Not the true believers like Murphy but the rest. The weekend warriors on issues of civil rights. The only way to reassure people that doing the right thing and backing your causes, our causes really, was to flood Murphy with money and help. He got support but nothing like he needed. And some of it came way to late. He should have been the single best funded congressman this year. Instead he's outspent. Tragic.

J
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
RedArmy
02:16 PM on 10/21/2010
I am afraid the great crusader Obama has again let dimmness fall upon America, why can he not just promise to put a straight bill forward that relates to DADT and DADT only.I mean Obama's puppets Harry and Nancy have accomplished all that their dark master has wished for, but yet again DADT and gay marriage are shoved to the back of the bus.Is every other bill so important that this President can not take the time for once and for all to committ to something?
02:42 PM on 10/21/2010
Feeling a bit used, eh? Well, get used to it, bucko. Obama is a l-i-a-r. The proof is in his spin~
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
RedArmy
02:59 PM on 10/21/2010
I honestly can not vote for these liars any longer.To me the choice in November is voting for the Devil or the Devils minion, I will choose the minion.This has been 19 months of fantasy, and I need a reality break.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
NeoConsAreFinished
Fight the Ah mer I cun talibanned
06:23 PM on 10/21/2010
Rightis are you and dcbarton going to get together and see if love is in the air?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ThePlague
Programmer by day, vampire pundit by ni
02:15 PM on 10/21/2010
President Obama is at last out of the closet as a card-carrying homophobe. We should have seen this coming given some of his associates during the primary season. He wants gay campaign contributions so he pays lip service towards ending DADT, but, when push comes to shove, not only does he not help to repeal it, he actively RE-INSTATES it after a lower court had overturned it. Not only has he done nothing for the LGBT community, he now is actively working AGAINST the LGBT community. He is a "fierce advocate" not for the LGBT community but rather for a return to the pre-Stonewall era. This man would have voted to keep sodomy criminalize were he on the Supreme Court during the Lawrence v. Texas decision. At this point I think Gov. Palin would be better on LGBT issues because she is at least not taking LGBT contributions and then stabbing them in the back. At least you know where she stands. President Obama is a classic, old-fashioned homophobe and that is all there is to it. Supporting his administration in any way would be a self-destructive act by the LGBT community. Sorry Mr. President, but I am one queen who doesn't buy your pathetic facade. Vote Anybody-But-Obama 2012!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jcwtts1
Elections have consequences
02:34 PM on 10/21/2010
give me a break. You want to know why you can't pass repeal of anything? Look at Pat Murphy. Under attack, major target and under funded. He should have had three times the war chest he had. Where are all the LGBT atm people when he needed it. Where are the people beating the street for the guy who threw himself on the granade of DADT willingly. He didn't like how slowly it was moving and volunteered to walk the bill through himself and people like you spend all your time complaining about obama. every time you want to say something negative about obama say something positive about murphy. send him money, get groups of people out to volunteer for him, all your obama energy should have been spent helping a guy who gets it. Obama isn't on the ballot isn't in danger of losing in 2012, and isn't worried about your vote anybody but obama bs. Do something productive for the love of mike. sheesh. I know that sounded harsh but you need a reality check here. Pat Murphy is going down in a close fight he needs money, like now. he needs volunteers like now. Stop griping and get into the fight!

J
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
MCWAY
11:19 AM on 10/22/2010
Did you miss the Congress' vote to end DADT? Now, all of a sudden, Obama's not supposed to follow the law, because (for the time being) the results of that ain't to your liking. It's the DoJ's job (and Lord knows, they've been lax on that for some time) to defend the federal laws on the books.

And, the issue that almost NOBODY on the left wants to address are the THREE appeals courts' ruling that have upheld DADT. Last time I checked, federal district courts don't trump appeals courts (even if they are in different districts). The judge, Phillips, should have granted the stay, until the appeals process took its course, to avoid any confusion, knowing the likelihood of a stay ordered from a higher court (i.e. the 9th).

Are we supposed to scrap the rulings of three appeals courts (one of which overturned a ruling, nearly identical to the one from Phillips), in favor of one federal court judge's ruling?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
rollingrock
02:06 PM on 10/21/2010
Oh the irony. Obama is supposed to be a consitutional and civil rights lawyer and here he is trying to reinstate DADT a law that is in such open and gross violation of our constitution and civil liberties its not even funny. If he is trying to outdo Bush in trampling our civil rights and shredding the US Constitution then I think he is succeeding. Heckuva job, Barry.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
02:52 PM on 10/21/2010
This constitutional lawyer refuses to say a word about the constitutionality of the law.
But he doesn't have to. If he thinks a judge's ruling is insufficient, that only a Congressional repeal will work, then he must believe the law in question is constitutional.
Claims of Obama's Constitutional expertise are greatly exaggerated.