More

'Don't Ask Don't Tell' Discharges Can Continue For Now, Supreme Court Rules

Dont Ask Dont Tell

MARK SHERMAN   11/12/10 11:37 PM ET   AP

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Friday allowed the Pentagon to continue preventing openly gay people from serving in the military while a federal appeals court reviews the "don't ask, don't tell" policy.

The court did not comment in denying a request from the Log Cabin Republicans, a gay rights group, to step into the ongoing federal court review of "don't ask, don't tell." The Obama administration urged the high court not to get involved at this point.

Last month, a federal judge ruled that the policy violates the civil rights of gay Americans and she issued an injunction barring the Pentagon from applying it. But the San Francisco-based appeals court said the policy could remain in effect while it considers the administration's appeal.

"Log Cabin Republicans are disappointed that the Supreme Court decided to maintain the status quo with regards to 'don't ask, don't tell,' but we are not surprised," said R. Clarke Cooper, the group's executive director. "We are committed to pursuing every avenue in the fight against this failed and unconstitutional policy."

President Barack Obama has pledged to push lawmakers to repeal the law in the lame-duck session before a new Congress is sworn in. But administration lawyers have in the meantime defended "don't ask, don't tell" in court.

The policy, which prohibits gays and lesbians from serving openly in the military, was lifted for eight days in October after U.S. District Judge Virginia Phillips ruled that it is unconstitutional. The Obama administration asked the appeals court to reinstate the ban until it could hear arguments on the broader constitutional issues next year.

Justice Elena Kagan did not take part in the court's consideration of the issue. Kagan served as the administration's chief Supreme Court lawyer before she became a justice in August.

___

Associated Press writer Julie Watson in San Diego contributed to this report.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Friday allowed the Pentagon to continue preventing openly gay people from serving in the military while a federal appeals court reviews the "don't ask, don't te...
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Friday allowed the Pentagon to continue preventing openly gay people from serving in the military while a federal appeals court reviews the "don't ask, don't te...
Filed by Whitney Snyder  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 2,547
  • 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 »  (30 total)
  1 of 5  
COMMUNITY PUNDITS
photo
Marcospinelli 04:39 PM on 11/12/2010
Our entire government, all 3 branches, are engaged in an elaborate game of 'Hot Potato'.  Each branch is kicking the can down the road to a later time or to another branch to have to deal with.  We have no leaders using the power and the tools of their offices to serve the American people.

Not only on repealing DADT, but on everything except when it comes to siphoning money from the  Read More...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
rotorhead1871
who are you jivin' with that cosmic debris?...
12:23 AM on 11/14/2010
this whole argument is moot, as people pretty much know who is gay and not gay...its easy to figure out as people send signals all the time and their lifestyle is easy to figure out....so really they are serving and the only thing missing is they cant legally go the mountain and yell out "I'm GAY!!!! but trust me most everyone already knows and ...thats just fine... .........so they are out .....sans the "I'm gay shout out..
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
gevan
the pilgrim has landed
11:29 AM on 11/15/2010
That's a different argument than the one the Supreme Court is considering.
11:31 PM on 11/13/2010
I love how everythingggggg in the US is a such a major issue lol, oh no gay people in the army!
09:55 PM on 11/13/2010
This really is no story. The Court's typically let federal laws stand during the course of legal challenges.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
gevan
the pilgrim has landed
11:30 AM on 11/15/2010
Well they could suspend discharges from the military until the final descision is handed down.
08:40 PM on 11/15/2010
Remember, that Congress has very broad latitude in regulation of the armed forces. It may be that the Court will overturn DADT, but it would be very unusual for the Court to stay such a law while the challenge is pending.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
08:22 PM on 11/13/2010
"I take issue... Obama--"DON'T ASK-DON'T TELL"-- not that SIMPLE...

"I've read and then I LISTENED to President Obama, during a TOWNHALL, and I must say that his explanation as to WHY he WON'T END it with just a STROKE of his GOLDEN "Commander-and-Chief" PEN, was as follows:

In short, Congress...CONGRESS PASSED A LAW forbidding Presidents from acting UNILATERALLY ! NOW...

1st--He had to ACCOMPLISH what NO OTHER PRESIDENT has (ie) He GOT the DEFENSE Secretary, the CHAIRMANS of the Joint Chiefs, to ALL agree that DADT should be totally ABOLISHED! ...and, for the FIRST TIME EVER they ALL testified, PUBLICLY, on the RECORD, exactly that! HUGE hurdle!!

...he continued, BY TICKING OFF all the other major hurdles (ie) that MILITARY Conclusion Report due in December. The President's ultimate GOAL is to write an"insulated" Bill, with the ULTIMATE GOAL of passing a LAW that can ONLY BE OVERTURNED by a future MAJORITY in Congress. And, like OTHER civil rights law, it'll never be OVERTURNED once it on the books, and PROVEN to be SUCCESSFUL!!

...he concluded by explaning that IF HE WERE TO change the law by 'EXCUTIVE ORDER', it is the prorogative of ANY (Repubican) future President to overturn any Executive Order-- BY Executive Order!

So, TAKE HEART!

PRESIDENT Obama "PROMISE" that DADT will be strucked down in HIS FIRST TERM, and I BELIEVE him! So, consider it as GOOD AS DEAD...the only choice will be BURIAL or CREMATION?!"”
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
gevan
the pilgrim has landed
11:33 AM on 11/15/2010
The federal courts declairing one law unconstitutional is as effective if not more so than passing some new law that invalidates the first. The Administration is dragging its feet on this.
04:44 PM on 11/13/2010
Just make the policy apply to all Government paid positions and see how fast it changes.
jeremyv1980
Tough times don't last. Tough people do!
05:27 PM on 11/13/2010
You would not miss the losses, trust me, or dont.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
rory talbot
Former Dem but they r now wing of Corp. party
11:56 AM on 11/13/2010
Cant wait for them to do away with class action suits. The final nail in the coffin of democracy is limiting access to the courts. Welcome to America, Inc.
10:57 AM on 11/13/2010
If they aren't going to stop the discharges, they need to at least fast track the court proceedings.
10:55 AM on 11/13/2010
I suppose judicial restraint is not some that would be applauded by the average poster here. Sounds pretty good to me however.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
01:09 PM on 11/13/2010
You have no idea of the meaning of judicial restraint.
03:14 PM on 11/13/2010
And you know little about what is best for the military or worse don't care.
photo
flipsmack
baby did a bad bad thing
10:42 AM on 11/13/2010
The argument against repealing DADT can also be applied to the corrupt defense contractors,ie Xe/Blackw@ter. Regards the general morale of our soldiers; aside from the big $$ those folks take in,the infractions and general trouble the contractors make for the soldiers to clean up. What is it called again,'Group cohesion'? Yeah,right.
09:33 PM on 11/13/2010
F&F - you gotta a guy next to a private and the mercenary is making six figures a year..
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Eileenla
Author, "Sacred Economics"
10:31 AM on 11/13/2010
Grow up America! Sexual orientation is no different than eye color, skin color or height, except in the perversely controlling ideologies of ancient dogmatic religions. We might as well ban redheads from serving for all the sense this law makes. Gays don't need to join the military to gain exposure to other males...they have the priesthood for that.
10:59 AM on 11/13/2010
Nice gratuitous shot at Catholics. If the same sort of racial sterotype was used I think there would be outrage on this page.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
03:42 PM on 11/13/2010
Not gratuitous at all. It was sarcastic. 

The Nazi pope was an enabler just like the rest of the church elders  in protecting criminal priests over protecting the Catholics they victimized.

Your comparison to racism is yet another example of reichie mental diarrhea.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ioan Lightoller
Proud Married Gay Pagan Man
03:52 PM on 11/13/2010
Maybe Catholic priests should keep their hands off kids?
01:13 PM on 11/13/2010
Funny, the silence on the post is screaming.
09:36 PM on 11/13/2010
Wow - prenty intense thread...

Allowing Catholic Priests to marry would be a good step.
10:22 AM on 11/13/2010
Honestly, don't you think gays serving openly can cause a lot of problems?
What about the fraternization? What about gays flocking to the military so it can become a hubba hubba club?

Don't misrepresent what I'm saying. I'm not against gays. They can live their lives how they want. It just seems like the military should be protected from becoming a sordid club of fraternizers.
10:28 AM on 11/13/2010
Seriously?
11:05 AM on 11/13/2010
You must be insane to ever think this could possibly cause any sort of problems...... This debate has completely lacked intellectual honesty. Even as women were integrated in the Service academies and had a greater role in the military there was a much more honest discussion about the issues involved. This is just a gimme and an I want discussion.
10:16 AM on 11/13/2010
Immoral or moral social tendencies should not be sorted out by the military, it is not the place for it. That is what the court system is intended for. You do not join the military to define your social stand on gay rights. You join to serve your country and at this point in times gays can serve their country under DADT.
10:23 AM on 11/13/2010
Only if they do it under a different and more restrictive set of rules than heterosexuals serve under. Last time I checked, that was unequal treatment (and unconstitutional)
10:51 AM on 11/13/2010
Since DADT was enacted in 1993 the military stopped asking if you were homosexual. Fair and equal treatment on your sexual preference was instilled at that point. In my 23 years on active duty not one person asked me my sexual preference. You do not join to bring light to social issues. What rules are you speaking of? Sodomy is illegal under UCMJ for all service members.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
hackerblaster
I did not mean that to be a factual statement.
06:06 AM on 11/16/2010
If you changed your outlook on using moral vs immoral I might have applauded you. How about just using 'sexual orientation"?
10:09 AM on 11/13/2010
Is anyone still betting that DADT will end on Obama's watch?
10:23 AM on 11/13/2010
Yes...whether through Congress in the Lame Duck or by Executive Order.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
gevan
the pilgrim has landed
09:14 AM on 11/17/2010
May all depend on how big his watch is.
10:08 AM on 11/13/2010
Yawn...zzzzzzzzzzzzzz
10:06 AM on 11/13/2010
So are you all angry that Obama is one of the biggest opponents to DADT? The hecklers seem to put the blame where it belongs