The Pentagon has ordered a halt to all separations of gay troops under “don’t ask, don’t tell” and will begin accepting applications from prospective recruits who identify themselves as gay, reports Army Times, following a ruling by a panel of the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in the case of Log Cabin Republicans v. United States.
It’s true that in a few weeks/months the administration would have formally ended DADT (60 days after the defense secretary and chairman of the Joint Chiefs certify that it will not adversely impact military readiness), after Congress voted to repeal the anti-gay-service law last December. But Log Cabin’s suit and the Ninth Circuit’s ruling are still good things. The court’s finding that the statute is unconstitutional because it treats gay Americans differently under the law is an excellent precedent to take into battle against the Defense of Marriage Act and other anti-gay government edicts.
4 Comments for “An Early End to DADT”
posted by Cindy on
Good job Log Cabin Republicans!
posted by Jorge on
The ruling in question is by a lower federal court, and the ruling was stayed pending appeal; the 9th Circuit lifted that stay, I believe explicitly citing the actions the Pentagon is already taking to implement an appeal. A fair decision, although I am a little antsy about the immediacy. The court is basically saying by this point we cannot possibly say that any remaining minute or mitigatable harms (of ending the policy immediately) can justify the continuation of the harms that the lower court has found. The Pentagon is just going to have to deal with the fact that its job got a little tougher than it would like it to be. Having read most of their study, I doubt even a worst case analysis could have kept the injunction going.
Anyway, it’s clear the two (the case and the repeal) fed into each other.
posted by Jorge on
Or are you saying that the Army Times got the story right and in fact that was the final ruling?
No, the Log Cabin Republicans state the case is being heard by the Court of Appeals in August.
posted by Lymis on
We’ll have to see how it actually plays out, but pending final certification, not separating people is not quite the same as allowing people to serve openly.
For example, I don’t see anything about this ruling that requires the military to keep people in their current job assignments, nor conducting the investigations required by the current outgoing policy. Getting transferred to a personnel office somewhere isn’t quite the same as being able to serve without fear of reprisal.
I could see it going either way – the military knows the end is near, and that it isn’t that big a deal. In many ways, integrating the people who are out (or outed) now gives some transition into people choosing to come out later when the policy is well and truly dead.