Tag Archives: The Department of Justice

DADT Is Back…… Again – 9th Circuit Court of Appeals Reverses Its Reversal

This has gotten so ridiculous you now need a scorecard just to to keep up……

The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has once again reversed its reversal on it’s DADT ruling NOW, as of late Friday ordering the military to temporarily continue its “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy for openly gay service members, responding to a request directly from the Obama administration.

 the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals said the ruling was based on new information provided by the federal government, including a declaration from Major General Steven A. Hummer, (add bad joke here) who is leading the effort to repeal the policy.

The court said it is once again was upholding an earlier ruling to keep DADT in place “in order to provide this court with an opportunity to consider fully the issues presented in the light of these previously undisclosed facts.” (continued….)

Continue reading DADT Is Back…… Again – 9th Circuit Court of Appeals Reverses Its Reversal

BREAKING: Department Of Justice Seeks Emergency Stay In 9th Circuit Court To Keep DADT In Use – WTF!

President Obama’s Department of Justice has requested a short-term emergency stay from the 9th Circuit Court to keep enforcement of the ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,’ law active barring gay and lesbian military personnel from open service

The 9th Circut ordered the military to cease enforcing the law by placing an injunction on the policy after the Log Cabin Republicans successfully won a case declaring DADT unconstitutional. The 9th Cir. later placed a stay on the injunction as the Obama Department of Justice continued to appeal the case.  Last week the 9th Cir. agreed with Log Cabin lawyers from the law firm White & Case that there was no need to continue enforcing the DADT policy and that the injunction on the policy should be put back in place and lifter the current stay.

States said R. Clarke Cooper, Log Cabin Republicans Executive Director:  “This latest maneuver by the President continues a pattern of doublespeak that all Americans should find troubling. All this does is further confuse the situation for our men and women in uniform.  Let me be clear – the president is asking the court for the power to continue threatening service members with investigation and discharge, and the right to turn away qualified Americans from military service for no reason other than their sexual orientation. Even if the administration never uses that power, it is still wrong, and the Ninth Circuit was clear that there is no justification for continuing the violation of servicemembers’ constitutional rights. ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ is an offense to American values that should have been gone long ago. It is shameful that a president who has taken credit for opposing the policy is taking extreme measures to keep it on life support.”

You can read the Log Cabin Republicans FULL STATEMENT HERE

Source:  the Washington Blade

Department of Justice Files Opposition to LCR Supreme Court Request to Vacate DADT Stay Order

Not that this is a shock but here we go……again.

Our pigheaded President and his Department of Justice has responded to the Log Cabin Republican request to vacate the stay that the Ninth Circuit placed on Judge Virginia Phillips’s injunction barring enforcement of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’: (Please notice on how they always wait till the very last minute to do so)

According to MetroWeekly:

“In a filing at the U.S. Supreme Court this afternoon, the U.S. government, represented by acting Solicitor General Neal Katyal, asked the court to leave in place the stay of U.S. District Court Judge Virginia Phillips’s injunction of the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy. The government’s argument would keep DADT in effect while the Log Cabin Republicans v. United States case is on appeal before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.”

The response was requested from Justice Kennedy when the LCR application was filed

Said U.S. Solicitor General Neal Katyal in the briefing: “It was entirely appropriate for the court of appeals to defer to the considered judgment of senior military leaders that any change in policy must be done in an orderly and careful manner in order to be successful.”

Log Cabin Republicans lead attorney, Dan Woods has issued a statement:

We have reviewed the government’s opposition to Log Cabin’s application to vacate the stay of Judge Phillips’s injunction by the Ninth Circuit. In our view, the government’s lengthy, detailed, 29-page brief does not address the two key arguments we presented to the Supreme Court. First, we argued that the premise of the government’s position–that it needs time to conduct an orderly process of repealing DADT–is entirely speculative because Congress has not and very well may never repeal DADT; the government’s filing today does not address that issue. Second, we argued that the Ninth Circuit order did not take into account the harm to servicemembers and potential enlistees resulting from the stay; the government’s filing today does not respond to that point either. At this point, all we can do is to look forward to a favorable ruling from the Supreme Court.”

How pathetic is all this?  All this fuss, bother, insult, and utter BULLSHIT over the fact that Gays and Lesbians want to defend their country. A country which in fact does everything that it can to hold them back and keep them second class citizens.

It’s truly time for pressure and ridicule from abroad from CIVILIZED countries like Canada and the UK  to begin PUBLICALLY SHAMIING the United States for its treatment of LGBT citizens.

The National Law Journal Takes Obama and The Department of Justice To Task Over Its "Duty To Defend The Law" and DADT Bulls#@t

Even the National Law Journal is now going public and taking to task The Obama Administration and the Department Of Justice’s ridiculous arguments that it has a “duty to defend the laws” that are on the books, even the ones that it doesn’t like like DADT supposedly.  In their article “Duty To Defend”, which unfortunately is locked behind a member’s only password, The NLJ spells it out.  Below are excerpts from the article.

DUTY TO DEFEND?
The Obama administration opposes “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” but it’s still poised to defend the law all the way to the Supreme Court. Justice Department officials say they are duty-bound to defend an act of Congress. Yet history shows that this argument doesn’t always apply. During the last six years, according to records maintained by the Senate, the Bush and Obama administrations told Congress 13 times that they were not defending a federal law in court

In 1992, back when Congress could occasionally agree on something, there was bipartisan anger over a beverage called Crazy Horse Malt Liquor because it insulted the memory of a Native American chief who happened to frown on alcohol.

Congress quickly passed a law barring federal approval of any beer label that displayed the words “Crazy Horse.” The brewer promptly sued, and not surprisingly a federal judge found the law unconstitutional under the First Amendment.

When the question of whether to appeal the ruling in Hornell Brewing Co. v. Brady arose, then-Solicitor General Drew Days III decided it would be futile; the law was beyond rescue. “Congress seemed to accept the decision not to go forward,” Days wrote later.

So much for the vaunted governmental “duty to defend” acts of Congress, which has been invoked often in recent weeks in connection with the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” law barring gays from the military — a law that the Obama administration opposes but still is poised to defend. In cases much bigger than Crazy Horse — think Buckley v. Valeo and INS v. Chadha — SGs have been throwing provisions of federal laws under the bus for decades. And Senate records show that, 13 times in the past six years, during both the Bush and Obama administrations, the Justice Department has told Congress it is not defending an act of Congress.

Valerie Jarret Defends The Department Of Justice And Basically Lies.

Valerie Jarrett this morning defended the Department of Justice appeal of the injunciton placed on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”, this morning and didn’t exactly tell the whole truth.

Said Jarrett to American Morning: “You know what, the Justice Department is required to defend the law of the land”

Interesting.  Because just last week The Department of Justice elected to let stand a court ruling which allows Christomaniacs and other religious groups to demonstrate, preach, and proselytize in Federal Parks and most related to the DADT/Obama fiasco in 1996  the Clinton administration, explaining in detail, how it was not going to defend in court any cases kicking HIV+ service members out of the military because it believed the law requiring such discharges to be unconstitutional.  Something Ms. Jarret left out of her morning defense.  The President could also have had the DOJ  “appeal” the order but tell the appellate court that the government agrees with the lower court’s reasoning and decision: The law is unconstitutional and should not be enforced.

The DOJ has not appealed many cases in the past.  And saying they “have to” doesn’t make it true.  But .

Lets really tell it like it is for a change..  Obama DOES want DADT to end on his watch.  But by appealing the lower courts decision and insisting that it goes through Congress he wants to make sure that Congress is the one who does indeed repeal it and his signature is only on the bottom document thus making Congress responsible.

Obama may want it to end.  But he doesn’t want it to be his legacy.

It’s high time for us all to send the White House rolls of toilet paper.  Because they are so full of shit.

BREAKING: The Department Of Justice Files Emergency Stay Request with Ninth Circuit on ‘DADT’

In a non-surprising move.  The Obama Administration and The Department of Justice has filed an emergency request with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals requesting a stay on the injunction barring enforcement of DADT. The DOJ requests the Ninth Circuit to enter the stay today. 

Now that didn’t take them long did it.  They must have had it all ready to go.

The government argues that The Log Cabin Republicans do not have the standing to maintain the case, a point that was argued by the government unsuccessfully at trial. and that the government has also shown a likelihood of success in its argument that the district court erred in ruling § 654 [the DADT law] unconstitutional on its face.

They also go on to argue that  the worldwide injunction against all enforcement of DADT — is improper because no class had been certified in the case. In other words, because this was not a class-action lawsuit, representing all those impacted by the alleged wrong, an all-encompassing injunction like that ordered by Phillips is improper
DADT is now officially Obama’s policy. It was dead, and now he’s bringing it back. No one can blame Bill Clinton anymore for the continuing existence of the bigoted policy. Obama owns it now. He is responsible for blatant bigotry and discrimination of Gay and Lesbian individuals.  Plan and simple.

Perhaps the Ninth Circut will surprise us.  But I wouldn’t hold my breath

Obama Administration Department Of Justice Files Last Minute Appeal To Dedend DOMA in Gill v. Office of Personnel Management

Just mere hours AFTER a Federal Judge ordered The Obama Administration to cease all “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” discharges immediately.  Obama’s Department of Justice will appeal the recent the victory in the recent DOMA Lawsuit that found DOMA discriminatory and would force the government to federally recognize all same sex marriages that have been performed in Massachusetts.

The Department of Justice filed a notice of appeal in the case of Gill v. Office of Personnel Management, the challenge brought by Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders (GLAD) to Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). Representing seven married same-sex couples and three widowers, GLAD filed Gill in March 2009. The case was heard in May 2010 by U.S. District Court Joseph L. Tauro, who issued a decision finding DOMA Section 3 unconstitutional on July 8, 2010.

We fully expected an appeal and are more than ready to meet it head on,” said Mary L. Bonauto, GLAD’s Civil Rights Project Director. “DOMA brings harm to families like our plaintiffs every day, denying married couples and their children basic protections like health insurance, pensions, and Social Security benefits. We are confident in the strength of our case.

The case is now before the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. The next step will be for the government to file its brief to that court arguing that Judge Tauro’s ruling was wrong. GLAD will then file its brief in opposition to the government, and finally the government will file a reply brief. At that point, the appeal will be scheduled for oral argument. Briefing could be concluded by the spring of 2011 with oral argument to follow by the fall of 2011.

The government also today filed its notice of appeal in the related case Commonwealth of Massachusetts vs. Department of Health and Human Services.

Co-counsel in the Gill case are attorneys from the firms Foley Hoag LLP, Sullivan & Worcester LLP, Jenner & Block LLP, and Kator, Parks & Weiser, PLLC.

Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders is New England’s leading legal organization dedicated to ending discrimination based on sexual orientation, HIV status, and gender identity and expression

That my readers is out fierce fucking advocate at work.

But hey, just remember what the HRC keeps telling us that the Administration is on our side and we owe this President our gratitude.

The Department Of Justice Files Injunction Against DADT Being Ruled Unconstitutional – Read The White House Press Release And The Injuction Filing

The Obama Administration’s The Department Of Justice waited until the very last minute today filed an objection to the injunction requested by lawyers for the Log Cabin Republicans last week following a judge’s declaration earlier this month that the law is unconstitutional. (Cowards)

The Advocate reports:

“‘[A]ny injunction in this case must be limited to plaintiff LCR and the claims it asserts on behalf of its members – and cannot extend to non-parties – plaintiff’s requested world-wide injunction of the statute fails as a threshold matter,’ assistant U.S. attorney Paul Freeborne wrote. Freeborne also argued that an injunction would preclude the government both from litigating other legal challenges to DADT or considering the terms of a stay barring discharges of gay and lesbian servicemembers.”

Americablog adds:

“Finally, the DOJ seems awfully concerned that if LCR wins this case, then the Obama administration will no longer be able to find that gay servicemembers hurt morale and cohesion. Why is the Obama administration so concerned about losing the ‘right’ to discriminate against gay and lesbian servicemembers.  This is not the brief of a party that wants to find a way out of this mess. The Obama administration is aggressively defending DADT when the Obama administration doesn’t have to do this. See here, here and here.”

Well, Obama has done just about everything they could think of that would ensure Republican victory in November.  They know the Right hates them and they have pissed off the Progressive Left.  WHO exactly do they think is going to vote for them?

So now we ait to see what the Judge decides.  This never ends. 

You can read the FULL INJUCTION FILING after the jump…..

What Reason Does The Department Of Justice Give For Fighting To Keep Defense Of Marriage Act? Paperwork Is A Bitch And We Might Have To Work

Thursday we brought you an update on Gill et al. v. Office of Personnel Management.   GLAD argued, in front of Judge Joseph Tauro on behalf of its 17 plaintiffs argued, that the Defense of Marriage Act is unconstitutional. But while Department of Justice idiot attorney W. Scott Simpson conceded that even the Obama administration “disagrees with DOMA as a matter of policy and would like to see it repealed,” (YEA RIGHT)  he also maintained a position that it “does not affect its constitutionality.” (meaning they have to defend it because it’s a law……which is a lie)   Moreover, and get this, keeping the law on the books, idiot Simpson argued, would allow the federal government and its agencies to not have to keep track of which states had legalized gay marriage, and which had not.

Here, Scott allow us to help, since you’re all so  incompetent:  First you need  to figure out how many states there are.  I know it’s hard for you but try.. Then you have to use some kind of search engine to bring all these things together.

Oh here.  Let me help so you can drop the case.

All settled now?

Federal DOMA Hearing In Boston Update – Day One

In a press release from GLAD about the hearing today in a federal court in Boston. GLAD is arguing that section 3 of DOMA is unconstitutional. The Obama administration’s Department of Justice is defending DOMA and actually had the nerve to send Scott Simpson who wrote the horrid DOMA incest/pedophilia brief last June. Good to know that who DOJ has fighting against our rights in Boston.

“This is a classic equal protection issue. The Constitution applies to gay and lesbian citizens, and married ones, too,” Mary L. Bonauto, GLAD’s Civil Rights Project Director, told the Court. “What governmental purpose does the US have as an employer in treating some of its married employees, retirees and surviving annuitants differently from other married persons, such that Nancy Gill pays for a self and family plan like some of her married colleagues, but the plan doesn’t cover her own spouse?”

Bonauto presented a three-pronged legal argument: By singling out only the marriages of same-sex couples, DOMA violates the equal protection clause of the United States Constitution; DOMA represents an unprecedented intrusion of the federal government into marriage law, which for 230 years has been legislated by states; and by denying federal protections to families, DOMA burdens the marriages of same-sex couples and their right to maintain family integrity.

U.S. District Court Judge, Joseph L. Tauro, vigorously questioned plaintiffs and defendants in a courtroom packed with supporters and media. Judge Tauro heard GLAD’s motion for summary judgment as well as the federal government’s motion to dismiss. The hearing addressed the core issue of whether DOMA Section 3 is constitutional six years after the first same-sex couples in the country started marrying in Massachusetts, the result of GLAD’s groundbreaking marriage case, Goodridge v. Department of Public Health.\

Here Bay Windows does initial reporting includes this passage about the DOJ’s argument:

Justice Department lawyer Scott Simpson, representing the defendants, and Judge Tauro started talking over one another almost right away during Simpson’s opening statement. Simpson tried to present DOMA in a “historical context,” saying that the status quo was not the separation of federal and state governments, but rather, heterosexual marriage, and that DOMA was trying to preserve this status quo. He went on to detail how federal recognition of same-sex marriage would confuse federal government programs that heretofore have not recognized same-sex married couples, a supposition which was quickly rebuffed by Judge Tauro. “The matter is so complex it would be a burden on the federal government?” the Judge asked.

Judge Tauro similarly challenged Simpson’s interpretation of heterosexual marriage being the status quo prior to DOMA. “That was a circumstance,” the judge said, “there was no law.”

Simpson was quoted by the AP calling gay marriage an “experiment”,

If Simpson’s arguments are of the quality he displayed in “that brief,” then this should be a slam-dunk. The man’s an fucking idiot.  And so is Barack Obama for letting the Department of Justice defend this law when it did not have to.