Yesterday, the Log Cabin Republicans legal team filed its response to the Obama administration objections to LCR’s proposed injunction. I posted DOJ’s objections here. The first line of the response sums it up:
The government’s objections fail to recognize the implication of its loss at trial.
LCR wants a worldwide injunction on the enforcement of DADT because that law has been found unconstitutional after a facial challenge. Nothing less.
Karen Ocamb has an interview with LCR’s lead attorney, Dan Woods, which includes this exchange:
KO: I just posted a piece on how upset folks are about the DADT Senate vote – and how now folks are turning to you guys. Do you have ANY idea of what a timeline for this case might look like?
DW: In terms of a timeline, I can only guess but I estimate that Judge Phillips will issue a permanent injunction, in one form or another, by the end of the next week. After that, the government has 60 days to appeal. In the meantime, they are likely to ask her to stay enforcement of the judgment, she is likely to refuse, and the government would then have to seek a stay from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Sorry it is so complicated.
So, the judge will soon issue her final order. At that time, DOJ will probably ask for a stay pending an appeal — and may even have to appeal to get the stay.
The Obama administration is aggressively defending DADT when the Obama administration doesn’t have to defend DADT. We’ve been saying making this point for over a year, since the DOMA brief debacle. See here, here and here. It’s not just us. Senators and House members are asking Obama not to appeal. But, every indication we’re getting is that DOJ will appeal.