Judge orders military to stop enforcing Don't Ask Don't Tell

[Wretched Excess]

Even though this comes from wikipedia, it seems that DADT is a presidential directive that sort of over rode an outright ban.

I still think the left is out to undermine the defense capabilities of the US.

I'm getting a bit twisted into knots by the nuances of this thing, myself.  there's never a constitutional law expert around when you need one, is there?    but honestly, how often does that really happen?

[TheSarge]

I understand that a law was passed by congress that implemented the presidential directive.  but I think we are having a "chicken or the egg" conversation.

I get what you're saying we and I agree.  This is a case of the judicial over stepping its boundaries.  Just like the judge that ordered the AF flight nurse back to active duty.

IMHO things like this will backfire on the libs and the activist judges.  There's nothing that says that the military can't punish these same soldiers for lying on official doccuments and either courts martial them or kick them out with a dishonerable.

[true_blood]

It was a law passed by congress under Bill Clinton. http://www.law.georgetown.edu/solomon/background.html

Why am I not surprised here?

[ToddWB]

so what exactly does this do? They're allowed out of the closet? They can now "swish" in uniform, hit on people? Special rights?

[TheSarge]

so what exactly does this do? They're allowed out of the closet? They can now "swish" in uniform, hit on people? Special rights?

They can't be kicked out for lying on their enlistment papers if this ruling is allowed to stand.

The rest is yet to be seen.  If DADT is repealed...it will be a nightmare of giant proportions for the DoD.

Call it the law of unintended consequences.

[dutch508]

They can't be kicked out for lying on their enlistment papers if this ruling is allowed to stand.

The rest is yet to be seen.  If DADT is repealed...it will be a nightmare of giant proportions for the DoD.

Call it the law of unintended consequences.

Lying on the enlistment forms? Yeah- they can be disiplined for it.

Not sure about being kicked out, though.

[TheSarge]

Lying on the enlistment forms? Yeah- they can be disiplined for it.

Not sure about being kicked out, though.

Wouldn't it fall under fraudulent enlistment?

[dutch508]

Wouldn't it fall under fraudulent enlistment?

Yes, it would. However, that doesn't mean an automatic discharge, so to speak.

[littlelamb]

If they lie then they should be kicked out but it is a damn if you do damned if you don't situation

[Wretched Excess]

I talked to a friend of mine that is a lawyer during happy hour.  he's not a constitutional expert, but he explained what he knew about this ruling.  there are two separate issues here;  one is that the judge overturned the DADT law.  we all disagree with that, but at least it was within the judge's constitutional scope.  then she issued an injunction barring the DoD from enforcing any part of DADT in any way.  THAT, my friends, is beyond her constitutional authority.

the whole thing will be appealed, but the obamites won't touch it until after the midterms;  they can't afford to piss off their base any more than they already are.

and so, the armed forces of the united states of america are, during a time of war, in limbo for a few weeks. 

the cowards.

 

[NHSparky]

Yes, it would. However, that doesn't mean an automatic discharge, so to speak.

If what they were lying about would have made them ineligible for enlistment is sure would.  Saw lots of entry-level shit that recruits copped to at MOT (moment of truth.)

[thundley4]

They can't be kicked out for lying on their enlistment papers if this ruling is allowed to stand.

The rest is yet to be seen.  If DADT is repealed...it will be a nightmare of giant proportions for the DoD.

Call it the law of unintended consequences.

Nope.  The left wants nothing more than to have US military become a cluster**** of nightmare proportions.

[TheSarge]

Nope.  The left wants nothing more than to have US military become a cluster**** of nightmare proportions.

Yup because right on the heels of a repeal of DADT...there will be a call to force the military to recognize gay marriages and civil unions as well.

Which will burden the DoD budget even more and force the SecDef to divert more funds away from war fighting stuff towards benefits for all of these newly added "marriages".

[Thor]

Yup because right on the heels of a repeal of DADT...there will be a call to force the military to recognize gay marriages and civil unions as well.

Which will burden the DoD budget even more and force the SecDef to divert more funds away from war fighting stuff towards benefits for all of these newly added "marriages".

And then there's the exorbitant medical costs associated with AIDS. It's already bad enough because of the immorality of certain military people. (Not talking about the gay ones, either)

[whitejackrabbit]

Kinda wish somone would make like Andrew Jackson and start ignoring these judges.

[Eupher]

Kinda wish somone would make like Andrew Jackson and start ignoring these judges.

Did you know that every time you post a comment you look like a complete fool?

[JohnnyReb]

Did you know that every time you post a comment you look like a complete fool?

Hey now, that's the first statement he's made that I could sorta agree with....and I think the current Marine Corps Commandant did.

[Eupher]

Hey now, that's the first statement he's made that I could sorta agree with....and I think the current Marine Corps Commandant did.

Well, it remains to be seen precisely what all this means, but I think it's an issue that must be addressed and not to be ignored.

When you've got senior officers that have jumped on the Obama bandwagon and essentially threatened Soldiers with expulsion for not embracing the homos and rug munchers, any "order" issued by a judge has to be addressed.

Andrew Jackson has been dead a long time. I'd like to say that the cronyism he brought to bear died with him, but that's not the case.

Besides, the poster is an idiot racist. That nullifies any halfway intelligible comment he might've made.

[DumbAss Tanker]

Kinda wish somone would make like Andrew Jackson and start ignoring these judges.

That had some real ugly consequences at the time, genocidal ugly as a matter of fact.  It's a first-class ticket on an express train to a place we don't want to go. 

[NHSparky]

Kinda wish somone would make like Andrew Jackson and start ignoring these judges.

Yeah, let's just ignore whichever branch of the government pisses us off at any given moment or which doesn't follow our agendas--what a wonderful ****ing idea!

Asshat.  I see you're not long for this place.

[Wretched Excess]

I am surprised.  I didn't think the obamites in the DoJ would budge until after the midterms.

U.S. appeals order lifting 'don't ask, don't tell' policy

Washington (CNN) -- The Obama administration has filed a request with the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to stay a lower court injunction stopping the military policy regarding openly gay troops serving.

Late Tuesday, U.S. District Court Judge Virginia Phillips in California denied the government's request for an emergency stay of her order barring the military from expelling openly gay service members.

That ruling came as the Pentagon has begun advising recruiting commands that they can accept openly gay and lesbian recruit candidates, according to a Pentagon spokeswoman.

The guidance from the Personnel and Readiness office was sent to recruiting commands on Friday, according to spokeswoman Cynthia Smith.

The recruiters were told that if a candidate admits he or she is openly gay, and qualify under normal recruiting guidelines, their application can be processed. Recruiters are not allowed to ask candidates if they are gay as part of the application process.

More

[thundley4]

I am surprised.  I didn't think the obamites in the DoJ would budge until after the midterms.

I'm surprised that they are doing it before the elections also, but not so much by the fact that they are appealing the ruling.  Most of the time the DOJ will appeal rulings that go against federal laws.(even this criminal one)

[Wretched Excess]

I'm surprised that they are doing it before the elections also, but not so much by the fact that they are appealing the ruling.  Most of the time the DOJ will appeal rulings that go against federal laws.(even this criminal one)

that's a normal DoJ, not one that has become a functioning arm of the "re-elect obama campaign".

 

[thundley4]

that's a normal DoJ, not one that has become a functioning arm of the "re-elect obama campaign".

 

Not to mention a racist one that drops cases that are already won.

[Wretched Excess]

even stranger still;  the ninth circuit granted the administration's request for an emergency stay of the judge's injunction.  so, DADT is in force once again, at least until the 9th circuit can decide if they want to issue a longer stay that will remain in effect until they can decide to hear the entire case.

tell me this sh*t isn't entirely too complicated.

NYT link