On Monday, a panel of the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals extended the freeze on an order by U. S. District Judge Virginia Phillips halting the enforcement of DADT. The panel of judges was persuaded by the government’s argument that suddenly ending the prohibition on gays and lesbians serving openly in the military could have a deleterious effect. In their majority order, Judges Diarmuid F. O’Scannlain and Stephen S. Trott wrote the following:
– “The public interest in enduring orderly change of this magnitude in the military – if that is what is to happen – strongly militates in favor of a stay.”
– “Furthermore, if the administration is successful in persuading Congress to eliminate (the policy), this case and controversy will become moot.”
Dan Woods, the lawyer for the Log Cabin Republicans who brought the suit, said the decision was “a disappointment not only to us, but also to all homosexual service members who bravely put themselves in harm’s way so that we can all enjoy the constitutional rights and freedoms that they themselves are being denied.” Woods also said that he would discuss whether to appeal the ruling to the U. S. Supreme Court with his clients.
Here we go again. I’m no lawyer–but I think DADT is a discriminatory policy against a group of Americans and, as such, has got to be unconstitutional. That’s my story–and I’m sticking to it.
How about instituting a new military policy called DD–Don’t Discriminate?
Other recent posts on the subject of DADT at the Turley blog:
– Elaine Magliaro, Guest Blogger