RECENT  POSTS:  » Video: Ad for blemish remover/ tourist spot for our new, bettered America » Whether justified or Kim Davis-ed, individualistic rage rarely outplays broader truths » Kim Davis: The almost too perfect coda to the marriage discrimination fight » Anti-gay clerks are going to have to do their jobs. Because of course they are. » Jeb really wants to remind voters of his anti-'same status' plan for gay couples » Maine: NOM finally forced to hand over its tiny, out-of-state, incestuous donor roll » This delusional primary: Huckabee claims 'same-sex marriage is not the law of the land' » The 'Yeah. Duh. Of course' phase of this fight » Trailer: 'Stonewall' » And now NOM is literally pleading with its (theoretical) supporters  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »


DADT appeal doesn't find a Souter

by Jeremy Hooper
The U.S. Supreme Court refused to question the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy that prohibits openly gay people from serving in the military, turning away a constitutional challenge to the ban.
‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ Policy Left Intact by U.S. High Court [Bloomberg]

Probably for the best, since (a) the current court is iffy at best, and (b) most seem to agree that a repeal should be done legislatively. Even the majority of involved with this case a the lower level weren't on board this proposed SCOTUS hearing.

But still, when dealing with such nasty policy as this, it's always kind of annoying when any attempt to flush it fails. It's kind of how we feel about particularly rancid garbage. We don't care who takes it to the curb or how they get it there: Its existence is so noxious that immediate eradication should be everyone's quick and efficient goal.

**RELATED: Law Dork puts this all into perspective: DADT SCOTUS ‘Rejection’: What’s It Mean? [LD]
SLDN's official release: Statement on the Supreme Court’s Denial of Cert [SLDN]

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper

Your thoughts

Oh, so very well said. Will use the garbage it!

Posted by: LOrion | Jun 8, 2009 12:05:28 PM

Unfortunately, most everyone, including me, thought at first a Supremes decision in this case would have ruled on the law [probably badly] but SLDN says it wouldn't have.

QUOTE: "Even if the Supreme Court had taken the Pietrangelo case, the Court would not have decided the constitutionality of DADT."

What DID happen?

"...In court papers, THE ADMINISTRATION said the appeals court ruled correctly in this case when it found that "don't ask, don't tell" is "rationally related to the government's legitimate interest in military discipline and cohesion."

In other words, Obama just castrated his own argument to Congress why they should repeal by DEFENDING the law for the SAME reasons that they justified passing it in the first place. What could he say to them now, "Oooops, sorry we take it all back"?

Posted by: Michael Bedwell | Jun 9, 2009 2:48:34 AM

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy

Related Posts with Thumbnails