This wouldn’t be necessary if Congress would do its damn job:
Three decorated military veterans discharged because they are gay filed suit Monday in San Francisco seeking reinstatement and another federal court judgment that the Pentagon’s ban on openly gay and lesbian personnel in the military is unconstitutional.
The lawsuit should serve as “a shot across the bow” to put Congress on notice that if lawmakers fail to repeal the law, those who oppose it will turn to the courts for relief, said Aubrey Sarvis, executive director of the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network.
U.S. District Judge Virginia Phillips in Riverside declared the law unconstitutional in September and ordered an end to military discharges based on service members’ sexual orientation. But the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals suspended her ruling until appeals by supporters of the gay service ban have been considered.
[...]
The suit was filed on behalf of Air Force veterans Michael D. Almy and Anthony J. Loverde, and former Navy Petty Officer Jason D. Knight. All three had been awarded numerous medals and commendations for their service before they were discharged.
I like Mike Almy. He’s such a levelheaded spokesman for why DADT needs to go.
I don’t see how we will prevail when it comes to these lawsuits. There is no Constitutional right to serve in the military. It would be nice if Congress were to do its job, but I have lost all confidence in them.
A new “stand alone” bill has been introduced, but passing it would require Harry Reid to call for a definitive vote. Reid is not a friend to our community. He is a craven politician; a snake.
I can understand having to fight the GOP on DADT, but we’re having to fight our own. If Reid’s re-election had depended on the repeal of DADT, it would have happened weeks ago. I’m tried of being told that “there is no time.”
This issue is so important that it boggles my mind that they don’t make the time to get it passed. When it comes down to it, the sad reality is that they just don’t care. To them, we are a fringe group. Neither Obama or Reid give a damn about this repeal.
It also wouldn’t be necessary if the administration would let the Supreme Court do it’s job, which is to uphold constitutional laws and strike down the unconstitutional. But no, for some reason that nobody seems to understand Obama wants to keep it in place until Congress repeals the policy, essentially cutting one branch of our government off the tree.
So much for checks and balances.
“There is no Constitutional right to serve in the military.”
True, but the Constitution does forbid religious discrimination by the government, and it also provides little support for government bureaucrats to wield arbitrary power against citizens.
If any of these cases make it to the Supreme Court, we will lose big. There is no way that the court will come down on our side.
One thing I’ve learned about Harry Reid…when he needs to be relied upon to do the right thing, he doesn’t. He is the biggest obstacle when it comes to repealing DADT.
Honestly, we’re already doing well in these cases, Chris. Indeed, there have already been two major rulings this year, one of which specifically found DADT to be unconstitutional. And I question your reasoning that there’s “no way” the Supreme Court will come down on our side. Evidence? Analysis which would lead you to that conclusion?
I agree that we have done well in the lower courts so far, but the Supreme Court will never rule in our favor. The court has virtually always, if not always, given the military extremely wide latitude regarding these issues. There is no Constitutional right to serve in the military. Our only hope is that Harry Reid will go the distance for us, but trust me, he will not.
Again, where is your analysis here? You’re correct that there is no Constitutional right, but in order to discriminate, the military must be able to show that there is a compelling reason to do so.
Your comments are striking me not as the result of informed, reasoned analysis, but rather fatalism.