Pentagon Reacts to ‘Don’t Ask Don’t Tell’ Ruling
EmailABC News' Luis Martinez reports:
With the repeal of "Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell" in the homestretch, a federal appeals court has barred the military from continuing to enforce the law that bans gay servicemembers from serving openly .
The ruling by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco will likely throw a wrench in the Pentagon’s ongoing plan to implement a repeal of the "Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell" law within a matter of months.
Under the repeal law passed by Congress last December the President, the Secretary of Defense and the Joint Chiefs Chairman have to certify that the readiness of the force would not be impacted by a repeal of the law which remains in place. That certification would trigger a 60 day clock that would then lead to full repeal. Former Defense Secretary Robert Gates said in media interviews before he left the Pentagon that he expected that certification to take place sometime in July. It’s unclear how the court’s ruling will affect that plan.
The ruling drew this response from Pentagon Spokesperson Cynthia Smith, “ We are studying the ruling with the Department of Justice.” She added, “We will of course comply with orders of the court, and are taking immediately steps to inform the field of this order. In the meantime, implementation of the DADT repeal voted by the Congress and signed in to law by the President last December is proceeding smoothly, is well underway, and certification is just weeks away.”
The three-judge panel ruled Wednesday that Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell must be lifted because the Obama administration has stated that it is unconstitutional to treat gay Americans differently under the law. Gay advocacy groups have hailed today’s court’s decision.
The ruling comes in a case involving the gay advocacy group known as the Log Cabin Republicans which scored a similar victory last October when a federal judge ruled the law unconstitutional and ordered the Pentagon to stop implementing the law. That ruling triggered a period of confusion when the law was no longer in effect.
At the time, Gates argued that legislation repealing the law would be preferable to a chaotic situation that might be created by a court immediately lifting the ban. He argued that would allow the Pentagon to come up with a plan for training its servicemembers and changing rules on the books that needed to be changed.
With Congress passing that repeal legislation in December, the military services earlier this year began a training regimen for their servicemembers about what the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell would mean for them. Senior officers have reported few problems during that training.
Since the repeal law was implemented, only one servicemember has been discharged from the military, and that involved an airman who wanted to voluntarily leave the Air Force under the law. Since then, three other airmen have stepped forward also requesting a discharge under the law.
Biden Reflects on Grief, Suicidal Thoughts 
Is Congress Sounding Dumber?
So what does this mean for the 3 who have asked to be discharged under DADT, now that the judges have stepped in and said DADT has to be dropped RIGHT NOW.
Does that mean the 3 self-identified homosexuals who want out of the service under DADT will now have to stay in the service? Or do they they now get to have it both ways?
Posted by: MikeGC | July 6, 2011, 8:00 pm 8:00 pm
“allow the Pentagon to come up with a plan for training its servicemembers and changing rules on the books that needed to be changed.” How lame.
Back in 1993, in less than 60 days DADT was put in place. Surely 7 months is long enough after 17 years of discrimination.
Posted by: Leslie | July 6, 2011, 8:24 pm 8:24 pm
“Does that mean the 3 self-identified homosexuals who want out of the service under DADT will now have to stay in the service? Or do they they now get to have it both ways?” – MikeGC
No Mike, that would make them Bisexuals not Homosexuals.
I’m so over all these DADT stories.
It is impossible to make something perverse into something normal, well maybe not, if society becomes too Liberal than there will be no norms. Wouldn’t that be fun!
LOL
: o )
btw, I don’t see why we can’t accept these people as a not normal part of society.
Posted by: Noz | July 6, 2011, 8:31 pm 8:31 pm
“Does that mean the 3 self-identified homosexuals who want out of the service under DADT will now have to stay in the service? Or do they they now get to have it both ways?” – MikeGC
No Mike, that would make them Bisexuals not Homosexuals.
I’m so over all these DADT stories.
It is impossible to make something perverse into something normal, well maybe not, if society becomes too Liberal than there will be no norms. Wouldn’t that be fun!
LOL
: o )
btw, I don’t see why we can’t accept these people as a not normal part of society.
Posted by: Noz | July 6, 2011, 11:19 pm 11:19 pm
@NOZ;
You say that you are so “over” all these DADT stories. So am I, so let’s end it already once and for all. I would be interested in your definition of “normal”. Are minorities abnormal because they aren’t the majority race? How about Jewish People since most people in America are Christian?
Posted by: Dino S. | July 6, 2011, 11:55 pm 11:55 pm
normal is not committing a sin that is clearly an abomination to God and for society to not recognize it as natural! such perversion!
Posted by: Monica | July 7, 2011, 12:23 am 12:23 am
What does a DADT Repeal mean for children?
DoD Panel Repeal Implementation Recommendations
5.3.2.1 For Children (p127, Vol 2, Findings from the Qualitative Research Tasks)
- Provide educational materials for school teachers and staff so that they can support children of gay parents, and answer questions other children may have;
- Offer informational materials to parents so they can talk to their children about these issues when they—the parents—are ready;
- Provide educational materials for the children themselves;
- Modify the educational curriculum to be inclusive of gay and lesbian families.
Of the 1.4 million people on active duty about half live off-base not residing on military installations; additionally, of the roughly 1 million members of our Reserve Forces, almost every city and town in America has a member of the National Guard or Reserve, as well as military recruiters, living in them. The DADT Repeal Review Panel recommendations reach into every on and off-base public school in America. The goal is to effectively ‘educate and train our military families and communities supporting them to accomplish successful implementation of an Armed Forces GLB manning policy.’
Posted by: journeyforward | July 7, 2011, 12:59 am 12:59 am
In 1993, DADT allowed gays and lesbians wide-berth to join and serve in the military–but recruiting plummeted. Why? It’s not about joining, it’s about using DoD as a tool for greater national gains in their agenda.
Once DADT is eliminated, same-sex couples from states where this type of marriage is legal could begin joining the Armed Forces and receive assignment orders to military bases in the majority of our nation’s states. Under the banner of being “U.S. servicemembers,” the Left and the U.S. Media will pull on people’s heartstrings using the persuasive argument that everyone volunteering to put their life on the line for our nation should have the right to marry regardless of their sexual orientation. Every state of servicemembers’ duty assignment as well as their Homes of Record will gradually have to honor these marriages. State laws will be chipped away at and eventually trumped by federal law regarding same-sex marriage.
Posted by: journeyforward | July 7, 2011, 1:02 am 1:02 am
normal is not committing a sin that is clearly an abomination to God and for society to not recognize it as natural! such perversion!
Posted by: Monica | Jul 7, 2011 12:23:29 AM
The Bible also forbids wearing cloth made out of a mix of wool and linen.
Another abomination!
Posted by: Flan | July 7, 2011, 1:14 am 1:14 am
Regardless of the issue, just because the obama administration says something is unconstitutional does not make it unconstitutional. In fact, the ruling itself flies in the face of the Constitution. Otherwise, any administration could say anything is unconstitutional and the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals would have to agree. This ruling is a farce and SCOTUS needs to correct the ruling before its comical rationale becomes precedence.
Posted by: clayusmcret | July 7, 2011, 6:35 am 6:35 am
“the Left and the U.S. Media will pull on people’s heartstrings using the persuasive argument that everyone volunteering to put their life on the line for our nation should have the right to marry regardless of their sexual orientation. Every state of servicemembers’ duty assignment as well as their Homes of Record will gradually have to honor these marriages.” – journeyforward
Don’t worry it won’t happen because there is actually no such thing as Gay Marriage.
Marriage is the Union of a Man and a Woman.
Some state somewhere will come to their senses and legalize Gar riage.
Garria ge is the Union of two people of the Same Sex.
Problem Solved.
“I would be interested in your definition of “normal”.” – Dino S.
Conforming to a standard, typical or expected.
In some aspects, I am not normal and I’m fine with that.
Society would be far better off accepting the non-normal in the world and living with it.
Trying to make deviant behavior “normal” when we all know it isn’t in order to be accepted is a failure of an agenda.
Posted by: Noz | July 7, 2011, 10:03 am 10:03 am
Mr. Tapper:
Your reporting contains a gross error.
You wrote, “The three-judge panel ruled Wednesday that Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell must be lifted because the Obama administration has stated that it is unconstitutional to treat gay Americans differently under the law.”
No. The 9th Circuit panel did not rule that the stay must be lifted “because” Obama said it’s unconstitutional.
Rather, the 9th Circuit panel affirmed that DADT is unconstitutional as the lower court ruled.
Then, they refused to keep the stay in place citing a number of reasons why the stay was no longer appropriate. Only one of those reasons made reference to the Obama administration position that laws discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation must meet heightened scrutiny as the standard of constitutional review.
I recognize that explaining the law in lay articles such as yours is not simple and requires deft authorship. Nonetheless, you do a great disservice to your readers by implying that the judicial branch of government would ever rule a law unconstitutional just because the executive branch said so.
Posted by: Glen | July 7, 2011, 10:30 am 10:30 am
Eh, don’t sweat the small stuff. The Obama administration ignores court orders whenever it suits them, so they can ignore this one, too. It’s only the looney toons Ninth after all.
Posted by: SukieTawdry | July 7, 2011, 2:06 pm 2:06 pm
Glen is absolutely correct about the extremely poor wording. The lower circuit court found the law unconstitutional a long time ago – this court is simply lifting a stay. No decision of constitutionality was made based on Obama’s comment *at all*. Please correct it.
Posted by: David | July 8, 2011, 4:41 pm 4:41 pm
It’s no wonder they call themselves “Log Cabin Republicans”, because they are all a bunch of Uncle Toms. Nonetheless, this court ruling is a good sign. There is increasing pressure on the Joint Chiefs to certify, which they really ought to do post haste.
Posted by: Dani3l | July 12, 2011, 3:59 am 3:59 am