BREAKING: Ninth Circuit Stays DADT Injunction

[babsbunny]

http://www.metroweekly.com/poliglot/2010/10/breaking-ninth-circuit-stays-d.html

Posted by Chris Geidner on October 20, 2010 7:08 PM | Permalink

A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has issued a temporary stay of U.S. District Judge Virginia Phillips's Oct. 12 order in Log Cabin Republicans v. United States halting all enforcement of the military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy.

After DADT had been halted from enforcement for nearly 200 hours, the Ninth Circuit order legally makes DADT enforceable again for the time being.

In a brief order, Judges O'Scannlain, Trott and W. Fletcher wrote:

This court has received appellant’s emergency motion to stay the district court’s October 12, 2010 order pending appeal. The order is stayed temporarily in order to provide this court with an opportunity to consider fully the issues presented.

[aquart]

1. Damn them.

[RKP5637]

2. This is all getting insane, absolutely insane. n/t

[slay]

14. +1

i think we're reaching a tipping point in this country between people who want to basically do the right thing - and right wing loons who abuse our justice system to continue fighting a battle they know they will lose. hopefully people will choose our side - but that whole teabagger crowd are a creepy alternative who a lot of people somehow identify with. blech.

[Davis_X_Machina]

3. @ 7:22

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4581792

Source: Reuters

Appeals court stays ruling on gays in military

SAN FRANCISCO | Wed Oct 20, 2010 7:17pm EDT
(Reuters) - A federal appeals court ruled on Wednesday that the Pentagon may temporarily reinstate a ban on openly gay men and women in uniform while a lengthier stay in favor of the "don't ask, don't tell" policy is considered.

The ruling by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco added to the disarray surrounding a landmark legal battle that already has forced the U.S. military to welcome openly gay recruits for the first time.

[Stinky The Clown]

4. Mr. Obama, Tear Down This Rule!

[ruggerson]

5. awaiting "Walter Dellinger" in 3......2.......1........

[QC]

11. And don't forget whatsername, the Official Queen of All Lesbian Lawyers!

We must not forget her!

[ruggerson]

13. I hadn't heard her name in years

until very, very recently.

[QC]

16. Now we hear it all the time. In precisely the same post.

Copied and pasted over and over.

[gateley]

6. Even though the administration seems to believe (and probably rightly so - they

understand the law far better than we do) that this has to be repealed via a definitive legal process in order for it to "stick", I was hoping this would just kind of "stay on the books" as it were and quietly become accepted.

The reason, apparently, that a judge can't "undo" a law is because then any judge could undo any law they wished -- that makes sense.

This back-and-forth seems to prove that. I think it needs to be REALLY DONE, just wish we'd get on it.

[ruggerson]

8. No, "any judge" can't undo any law they wish

this happened ONLY because Obama's DOJ requested the stay.

The administration is the ONLY one with standing to do that in this case.

[gateley]

9. Sorry, I didn't make myself clear - that's exactly what I was trying to say. nt

[Renew Deal]

7. That's depressing

I hope Obama has a plan and that it works.

[Pab Sungenis]

10. Thank you, Mr. President

this latest defeat of our civil rights is all thanks to you.

[backscatter712]

12. Time to take the fight to the appeals court.

That fight is going to happen sooner or later, even if Obama didn't appeal - the fight over gay rights would end up coming to the appeals court, and eventually to the Supremes sooner or later, maybe with DADT, or DOMA, or gay marriage.

In any case, it's time to rumble. The facts are on our side, the district courts are on our side, the Constitution's on our side. And chances are good that once it gets to the Supreme Court, Kennedy will be on our side, as he was the deciding vote in Romer v. Evans and Lawrence v. Texas, and wrote the decisions. If he voted against gay rights, he'd have to overturn his own decisions.

I'm confident that the good guys will win this one. Let's rumble!

[Solly Mack]

15. k/r