Watch: Dan Choi on ‘DADT’ Ruling

Choi_brewer

Dan Choi appeared on MSNBC today with Contessa Brewer to give his thoughts on yesterday's ruling declaring "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" unconstitutional.

Watch, AFTER THE JUMP


Towleroad News #gay

—  John Wright

White House Responds To DADT Ruling

Towleroad has received the below statement from White House spokesman Shin Inouye.

“The Justice Department is studying the decision, including the question of its scope and immediate effect and we expect them to announce their next steps after that review is completed. The President remains committed to legislative repeal of DADT, and he will continue to work with lawmakers to achieve that goal this fall. And he will continue to work closely with Secretary Gates, Admiral Mullen, and the Joint Chiefs of Staff on an ongoing study of how to best implement the repeal.”

Joe. My. God.

—  John Wright

Dan Choi on DADT fed ruling

From Dan Choi to the Blend:

I commend Judge Phillips, Alex Nicholson and the Log Cabin Republicans for their firm stance in defense of the First Amendment and their unwavering support of our national security. I demand President Obama and Senator Reid do the same, as our moral obligations compel us to strike down injustice and discrimination wherever it exists.

Judge Phillips has forthrightly exercised her unquestionable moral authority and lived up to her mandate to defend our constitution against a most vicious domestic enemy: discrimination against honest Americans. At a time when patriots suffer oppression for simply expressing truth and love, it is morally repugnant for any leader to delay justice based on self-interested timelines of political expediency.

I implore President Obama and his Justice Department to refuse lifting a finger, refrain from wasting any energy, statements, or money defending “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” in the court system. His constitutional and moral obligations are most compelling at this historic time.

Pam’s House Blend – Front Page

—  John Wright

Concerned Woman Are Concernstipated About That DADT Ruling

“It should not be activist judges who determine what is best for our troops. This judge’s ruling shows a blatant disregard for Congress and the military. It should only be at the discretion of Congress and those in military positions who are trained and competent to decide what is in the best interest of the military and what regulations are best for the readiness of our troops.” – Penny Nance, plastic surgery addict and CEO for Concerned Women for America.

Joe. My. God.

—  John Wright

Federal Court Overturns Military’s ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ Policy: Read the Ruling Here

A federal judge has declared the military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy unconstitutional and barred the military from enforcing it, ruling in a case brought by the Log Cabin Republicans.

Soldier The L.A. Times reports:

"A federal judge in Riverside declared the U.S. military’s ban on openly gay service members unconstitutional Thursday, saying the 'don't ask, don't tell' policy violates the 1st Amendment rights of lesbians and gay men. U.S. District Court Judge Virginia A. Phillips said the policy banning gays did not preserve military readiness, contrary to what many supporters have argued, saying evidence shows that the policy in fact had a 'direct and deleterious effect' on the military. Phillips said she would issue an injunction barring the government from enforcing the policy. However, the U.S. Department of Justice, which defended 'don’t ask, don’t tell' during a two-week trial in Riverside, will have an opportunity to appeal that decision."

Phillips has given the plaintiffs until September 16 to submit a proposed judgment, including a permanent injunction, consistent with the Court's opinion. The Department of Justice then must submit its objections by September 23.

Said LCR executive director R. Clarke Cooper: "As an American, a veteran and an Army reserve officer, I am proud the court ruled that the arcane ‘don't ask, don't tell’ statute violates the Constitution. Today, the ruling is not just a win for Log Cabin Republican service members, but all American service members."

The court agreed to hear the case on June 29. Earlier in June, the Department of Justice asked the judge to defer proceedings in the case "because the political branches have taken concrete steps to facilitate repeal of the DADT statute." 

Closing arguments were held in the case on July 23, at which time the plaintiffs asked the court to declare the policy unconstitutional and issue an injunction, which Phillips did today.

The AP adds: "Government lawyers argued Phillips lacked the authority to issue a nationwide injunction and the issue should be decided by Congress…Six military officers who were discharged under the policy testified during the trial. A decorated Air Force officer testified that he was let go after his peers snooped through his personal e-mail in Iraq…Lawyers also submitted remarks by Obama stating 'don't ask, don't tell' weakens national security."

Alex-nicholson The case through which the law was struck down, Log Cabin Republicans vs. U.S.A., was originally filed in 2004. Servicemembers United's Executive Director, J. Alexander Nicholson (pictured), is the sole named injured party in the lawsuit.

Said Nicholson, a former multi-lingual U.S. Army interrogator who was discharged under 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell.': "This is an historic moment and an historic ruling for the gay military community and for the readiness and integrity of our Armed Forces. As the only named injured party in this case, I am exceedingly proud to have been able to represent all who have been impacted and had their lives ruined by this blatantly unconstitutional policy. We are finally on our way to vindication." 

HERE'S THE RULING:

DADT Unconstitutional


Towleroad News #gay

—  John Wright

Federal Court Overturns Military’s ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ Policy: Read the Ruling Here

A federal judge has declared the military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy unconstitutional and barred the military from enforcing it, ruling in a case brought by the Log Cabin Republicans.

Soldier The L.A. Times reports:

"A federal judge in Riverside declared the U.S. military’s ban on openly gay service members unconstitutional Thursday, saying the 'don't ask, don't tell' policy violates the 1st Amendment rights of lesbians and gay men. U.S. District Court Judge Virginia A. Phillips said the policy banning gays did not preserve military readiness, contrary to what many supporters have argued, saying evidence shows that the policy in fact had a 'direct and deleterious effect' on the military. Phillips said she would issue an injunction barring the government from enforcing the policy. However, the U.S. Department of Justice, which defended 'don’t ask, don’t tell' during a two-week trial in Riverside, will have an opportunity to appeal that decision."

Phillips has given the plaintiffs until September 16 to submit a proposed judgment, including a permanent injunction, consistent with the Court's opinion. The Department of Justice then must submit its objections by September 23.

Said LCR executive director R. Clarke Cooper: "As an American, a veteran and an Army reserve officer, I am proud the court ruled that the arcane ‘don't ask, don't tell’ statute violates the Constitution. Today, the ruling is not just a win for Log Cabin Republican service members, but all American service members."

The court agreed to hear the case on June 29. Earlier in June, the Department of Justice asked the judge to defer proceedings in the case "because the political branches have taken concrete steps to facilitate repeal of the DADT statute." 

Closing arguments were held in the case on July 23, at which time the plaintiffs asked the court to declare the policy unconstitutional and issue an injunction, which Phillips did today.

The AP adds: "Government lawyers argued Phillips lacked the authority to issue a nationwide injunction and the issue should be decided by Congress…Six military officers who were discharged under the policy testified during the trial. A decorated Air Force officer testified that he was let go after his peers snooped through his personal e-mail in Iraq…Lawyers also submitted remarks by Obama stating 'don't ask, don't tell' weakens national security."

Alex-nicholson The case through which the law was struck down, Log Cabin Republicans vs. U.S.A., was originally filed in 2004. Servicemembers United's Executive Director, J. Alexander Nicholson (pictured), is the sole named injured party in the lawsuit.

Said Nicholson, a former multi-lingual U.S. Army interrogator who was discharged under 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell.': "This is an historic moment and an historic ruling for the gay military community and for the readiness and integrity of our Armed Forces. As the only named injured party in this case, I am exceedingly proud to have been able to represent all who have been impacted and had their lives ruined by this blatantly unconstitutional policy. We are finally on our way to vindication." 

HERE'S THE RULING:

DADT Unconstitutional


Towleroad News #gay

—  John Wright

Texas Appeals Court Rejects Judge’s Ruling Allowing Gay Divorce

The Fifth District Court of Appeals in Dallas, Texas today reversed an October 2009 decision by District Judge Tena Callahan allowing a same-sex divorce, with instructions to dismiss the case for lack of jurisdiction, the Dallas Morning News reports.

Callahan In her 2009 decision, Callahan ruled that "the state prohibition of same-sex marriage violates the federal constitutional right to equal protection" and ruled that two men married in Massachusetts in September 2006 could divorce in the state.

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott and Governor Rick Perry expressed angst over Callahan's ruling.

Said Abbott at the time: "The laws and constitution of the State of Texas define marriage as an institution involving one man and one woman. Today's ruling purports to strike down that constitutional definition – despite the fact that it was recently adopted by 75 percent of Texas voters."

Added Perry: "Texas voters and lawmakers have repeatedly affirmed the view that marriage is defined as between one man and one woman. I believe the ruling is flawed and should be appealed."

Abbott appealed. Arguments were heard in April.

Today the court rejected Callahan's ruling: "Same-sex marriages or civil unions are prohibited by a voter-approved amendment to the state Constitution and the Texas Family Code. The appeals court said today that the trial court wrongly ruled that those provisions violate the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment."


Towleroad News #gay

—  John Wright

Judge Delivers Split Ruling in NOM Maine Donor Disclosure Case

Nom_maine A U.S. District Court has ruled in the Maine case seeking disclosure of the names of donors to the successful effort by the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) to repeal the state's marriage equality law:

"Saying a state law requiring that the names of donors be disclosed within a certain time frame is 'unconstitutionally vague,' U.S. District Judge D. Brock Hornby nevertheless said the request by the state Commission on Governmental Ethics and Election Practices that the National Organization for Marriage disclose names of donors who gave money to defeat a gay marriage law in Maine is not a burden on NOM’s freedom of speech.

But Hornby took shots at some of Maine’s campaign finance disclosure rules. The judge said rules requiring 24-hour disclosure of independent expenditures over 0 — not just before an election, but whenever they occur — 'has not been justified … is impermissably burdensome and cannot be enforced.'"

It's unclear from the article what happens next. Will update this post with any additional information…


Towleroad News #gay

—  John Wright

Mixed District Court ruling for NOM; or as they’ll surely call it: partly activist, partly okay

Not sure what to make of this mixed-bag decision, really:



PORTLAND — A U.S. District Court judge has delivered a split ruling that backs disclosing the names of out-of-state donors who helped repeal a gay marriage law in Maine.

Saying a state law requiring that the names of donors be disclosed within a certain time frame is “unconstitutionally vague,” U.S. District Judge D. Brock Hornby nevertheless said the request by the state Commission on Governmental Ethics and Election Practices that the National Organization for Marriage disclose names of donors who gave money to defeat a gay marriage law in Maine is not a burden on NOM’s freedom of speech.

But Hornby took shots at some of Maine’s campaign finance disclosure rules. The judge said rules requiring 24-hour disclosure of independent expenditures over 0 — not just before an election, but whenever they occur — “has not been justified … is impermissably burdensome and cannot be enforced.”

Judge: Names of gay-marriage foes must be disclosed [Portland Press Herald]

So it seems good, but with some caveats. Still chewing on it; see below and form your own thoughts.

**The full opinion:



Dbh 08192010 1-09cv538 Natl Org for Marriage v Mckee




Good As You

—  John Wright

9th Circuit Keeps Stay On Prop 8 Ruling: No Marriages Just Yet

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has granted ProtectMarriage.com's emergency request for a stay in Judge Vaughn Walker's Prop 8 ruling, which means the possibility of same-sex marriage resuming on Wednesday, when Walker ordered a temporary stay lifted, is dead. The Court did, however, place the case on its "expedited" list, and will (theoretically) more quickly decide whether to rule the defendant-intervenors have proper standing to appeal.


Permalink | 17 comments | Add to del.icio.us
Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Queerty

—  John Wright