Skip to comments.In reversal, federal court orders immediate end to Ďdonít ask, donít tellí policy(9th U.S. Circuit)
Posted on 07/06/2011 1:10:04 PM PDT by fwdude
By Associated Press, Updated: Wednesday, July 6, 2:34 PM
SAN FRANCISCO A federal appeals court has barred further enforcement of the U.S. militarys ban on openly gay service members.
A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco said Wednesday the dont ask, dont tell policy must be immediately lifted now that the Obama administration says its unconstitutional to treat gay Americans differently under the law.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Thanks Obama, but only the Supreme Court can say it is unconstitutional.
“A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco...”
Did you have to read any more than this? The Obama vote-building machine continues to crank.
“must be immediately lifted now that the Obama administration says its unconstitutional to treat gay Americans differently under the law.”
Now I’m not a lawyer and I didn’t stay at a Holiday Inn last night, but this doesn’t make sense.
That’s what I thought, but bam doesn’t care what the Supreme Court thinks. HE thinks they are under his command to do his bidding. He needs a severe rebuke and a hell of a slap in the face before he gets it. If it is not forthcoming, we have no place to turn anymore and are now under the yoke of all out tyranny.
What about transvestites serving in the military?
No s—t! And only the Ninth Circuit court justices could get their individual heads so firmly implanted on that issue.
Next in line.
Does a federal court have any authority over the policies of the US military?
anyone watch Frontline last night?? i never watch it but was flipping through the channels and saw it was about the wikileaks and stopped for a minute- which turned into a half hour....
thehy went through the history of the downloading of confidential material by daniel manning and one theme rang through the entire episode- manning was downloading the info because he was angry he had been jilted by his gay friend, not in the military, and wanted to do something “huge”...the majority of the theft by manning happened after he found out on facebook his man-lover had jilted him- he was nothing more than an angry homo...
why bring this up? all i could think about was the repeal of DADT and the cause of manning’s actions as i watched last night...
It only makes sense if you're a Marxist.
The 9th circuit court? This verdict is about the only thing nowadays that is totally “expected”.
If congress had any balls, they would redraw the 9th Circus to limit their jurisdiction to the San Fransicko Bay Area or, better yet, Alcatraz Island.
this is actually encouraging; the 9th circuit is reversed more than any federal court in the land.
If they cannot use DADT they must revert to the prior, in the abcense of a new reg.
Exactly. As soon as I saw “9th Circuit” I knew it wasn’t going to be good news.
A later conservative president may state that the violation of the will of the people by a court forcing gay marriage is unconstitutional. Somehow, I don’t think at that time the 9th will give deference to the authority of the President to declare something unconstitutional.
No it doesn’t.
Yes, the most over-turned circuit in the country, stumbles into another bunch of left-wing crap.
I don’t get it
It WAS repealed and the military is working to make sure it is repealed but the military said it would take time
so it has been what? 2 mons but the Homo 9th court thinks that isn’t fast enough?
Hey, cut 'em some slack -- the guys on the court wanted to get home to their boyfriends.
Hate to tell you, but the barbarians are already running the country. A panel of them just gave this order.
because Obama passed an edict it is now law?
Judges should have to be recertified every year.
Another question arises.....why (and how) did a private in the Army have access to so much sensitive classified information?
“the guys on the court wanted to get home to their boyfriends.
unless their boyfriends are on the bench with them.
ewwwww don’t sit on tha bench. :)
Can’t wait for the pink camo uniforms too come out. Those will be just so sweet with their white tennis shoes and long ear rings.
Well, at least they are being honest in that they admit their analysis begins and ends with “whatever Obama tells us to do”.
How convenient, just as the SCOTUS starts its Summer recess.
Won’t last very long in a war zone, just sayin’
Devolution. And some atheists think we’re evolving into a higher species? Whatta joke.
Part of my email from Family Research Council:
“Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.) has another request. Together with 31 other members, the Marine veteran has asked the President to delay the certification of the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal until the military has an opportunity to clear up the mass confusion sparked by the policy change.
“Merely providing ‘training and educational’ briefs to our service members is not enough to justi fy moving forward with certification when consequential policy and regulatory changes associated with implementation must be reviewed by Congress under its oversight function... It is imperative that Congress have the ability to exercise its authority...” Anything less, he writes, is irresponsible.”
At least at my command, everyone has had mandatory DADT “repeal” training.
Just from the nature of the training, I can tell there are huge cans of worms being opened right now, if the policy isn’t reversed.
A true repeal of DADT would be a return to the days when potential recruits were asked, and an affirmative answer kept them from joining. We’re not seeing a repeal. We’re seeing a brand new policy. Using the language that it’s a “repeal” helps to create a belief that gays were always allowed into the military until Clinton instituted DADT. But that couldn’t be further from the truth. Clinton’s DADT policy was a carrot for the gays: he couldn’t actually repeal the ban on gays in the military, so he did what he could to placate the gay lobby by preventing recruiters from asking about it.
Choosing language to frame an issue to make it seem like the issue historically was the way the left wants it to be now is a favorite Orwellian tactic of the left. Those of us on the right should avoid repeating the left’s propaganda tactics.
So here is how it goes....
-Obammy encourages lawsuits against laws he disagrees with, in courts like the 9th circus where it is sure to rule in a liberal manner...
-Obammy puts up a weak or non-defense on behalf of the government...
-Obammy refuses to challenge the 9th circus or appeal it to SCOTUS.
-ALL THE REST of us are ruled to have NO STANDING to sue because that’s the job of the executive branch.
Ever notice that almost every major abomination we’ve had to accept involves the phrase “court ordered”?
Well we are just gonna have to ban “Fruity People” instead.
“gay” is ok.
>>> Now Im not a lawyer and I didnt stay at a Holiday Inn last night, but this doesnt make sense.
I haven’t read the opinion and probably won’t, but my guess is it goes something along these lines.
1) The 9th Circuit has the case because the Obama DOJ appealed the ruling in October when the lower court judge invalidated DADT;
2) The Equal Protection Clause in the 14th Amendment says in part “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”;
3) Obama’s DOJ now has taken the position the DOMA is unconstitutional, making arguments against DOMA that are contrary to the arguments it made to support DADT in this case;
4) Taking judicial notice of the inconsistency the court applies Equal Protection, and rules the DADT objections waived or unsustainable.
Don’t worry. Holder will appeal this to the Supreme Court. Obama can’t take credit for an eventual DADT repeal if it’s the Log Cabin Republicans who win the case. Can’t allow that.
Yet where were the Republican pundits and politicians to point out this obvious fact? I don't recall any.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.