If Obama loses his appeal of the DADT ruling, will he appeal to the Supreme Court?

[boston bean]

Afterall, it is a law that he must defend, that is what we are talking about here, right? <sarcasm>

Does anyone think DADT will be repealed congressionally during this lame duck session in Nov and Dec?

I know people don't like a hypotheticals, but the Supreme Court could possibly be the next step, if he loses, will the Obama admin fight to keep DADT alive in front of the SCOTUS?

On the other hand, if the admin wins this appeal, DADT is alive and well, they obviously won't appeal their win to the SCOTUS.

I think a congressional repeal is a real long shot, it's already been voted down by the Senate.

Where is the fierce advocacy in a strategy that pretty much guarantees the status quo?

[MadHound]

1. I think he is counting on it going to the Supremes,

I think that this is part of his strategy, let issues that he personally supports, but can't support politically, go through the courts and have the courts do his dirty work for him. He is choosing the same route on the Ashcroft lawsuit as well.

[boston bean]

2. So he is banking on the Supreme Court taking his winning or losing appeal and reversing it?

That is just crazy, if true.

edit to add "or losing"

[Prism]

4. He's ok with gambling with LGBT lives

Seriously, he's putting this into the hands of the Roberts Court because he's too cowardly to do it himself.

I mean, jesus.

[boston bean]

5. If he really wanted it to go to the SCOTUS, he would not have appealed and let

the appellate court reverse the lower court all by it's lonesome, and then appealed direclty to the SCOTUS.

That is if he thinks Roberts court would find DADT unconstitutional.

[MadHound]

7. I think he is banking on the Supreme Court on upholding DADT

Just like I think he's banking on a shorthanded court (Kagan has to excuse herself from this case) setting precedent in the Ashcroft case and essentially putting the AG above the law.

Obama is, as we've seen, no friend to the LGBT community, not when it comes down to brass tacks. Yes, he talked the good talk during his campaign, but when push comes to shove, he backs down. Not to mention that he's already stated that he doesn't want gay marriage.

He is essentially wanting to have his cake and eat it as well.

[Historic NY]

14. Exactly thats why its an important legal maneuver now, so as not to be stung later...

don't think for a momment some RW Evangelical group would think to overturn this present ruling as its stands.

[MadHound]

16. Umm, if he refuses to appeal,

The RW group wouldn't be able to overturn this present ruling. There isn't an indefinite window for appeals to remain open.

[BzaDem]

20. Your theories keep changing. First, you thought Obama was appealing the ruling because he wanted

credit for signing a repeal bill into law.

Now, you think he WANTS the case to go to the SC, so he can AVOID publicly taking credit politically?

:rofl:

Have you ever considered Occam's razor? Just maybe, perhaps, Obama is doing the best he can, given our system of government and the law?

No, that couldn't be it. There must be some conspiracy somewhere. :sarcasm:

[stillwaiting]

23. It's REALLY fucking rude to present ROFL smileys in threads that address this topic.

This is EXTREMELY emotionally draining for many of us.

Bring your point of view. That's fair. Just please try and have a little more empathy if it's at all possible.

A lot of us are angry right now. Very angry. That anger may even prevent some of us from not voting for Obama which is understandable. It's short sighted due to judiciary appointments, but it's understandable.

Empathy would be nice at a supposedly liberal blog.

[BzaDem]

24. I absolutely have emapthy for discharged soldiers, and I never even hinted otherwise.

I also have empathy towards people who want DADT thrown out, and I happen to be one of them.

Who I don't have empathy towards are people who constantly bash Obama's motives, coming up with stranger and stranger conspiracy theories for doing so. (He's homophobic! Or, he's not homophobic, but he wants political credit for repeal! Or, he doesn't want political credit for repeal, so he is letting Courts do it for him!)

In many cases, the simplest explanation tends to be correct. That is true in this case: Obama is appealing for the exact reason he says he is appealing. Because it would be inconsistent with the Constitution's command that the laws be faithfully executed to do otherwise. Obama is appealing for the same reason Bush's DOJ vigorously defended McCain-Feingold (and won), despite Bush publicly expressing his view that it was unconstitutional.

[riderinthestorm]

25. I bash Obama's motives. The stay on the injunction is a pure indicator of Obama's REAL feelings.

He had no reason to do this except spite. This isn't a crazy conspiracy theory to some, it's simply looking at the facts of what he's done -from Donnie McClurkin, Rick Warren, the despicable DOMA defense etc. etc. and now this.

I am bashing his motives. At this point, they seem crystal clear.

[BzaDem]

26. In that case, you shouldn't expect empahty from anyone.

As far as the substance goes, the stay is certainly not an indicator of Obama's feelings. And on top of that, it isn't even likely an indicator of DOJ career employee feelings. It is an indicator that some career employees at the DOJ want to defend all laws vigorously, even moreso than the Constitution might require them to do. While I don't agree that they should defend DADT beyond what the Constitution requires, their disagreement with me on that abstract legal question has nothing to do with their feelings about the law.

Though REGARDLESS of the substance, you really shouldn't be complaining about empathy when you are basically calling Obama a spiteful homophobic liar on a progressive message board. You aren't going to get it.

[treestar]

30. It IS draining for those who deliberately cultivate the emotions over

the intellect.

But then EVERY FUCKING THING is "draining" to such people.

[no_hypocrisy]

3. Likely.

He doesn't want to be held politically responsible for changing the military. He wants another branch of the government to take the credit/take the blame/be held accountable. Sheerly for the sake of his political base. Or not giving the republicans one more issue to use against democrats.

[CBGLuthier]

8. Like that fucking loser Harry Truman?

Dumb SOB integrated the army, mere fucking WEEKS before the 1948 election and then lost his reelection.

Oh wait, that was a famous newspaper headline I read once, Dewey Beats Truman Because He Loves Negroes.

My Mistake.

[no_hypocrisy]

11. Sigh! I WISH Obama was more like HST.

[donco6]

15. Don't we all. n/t

[BzaDem]

27. That's because there was no congressional law actually prohibiting the integration of the army. n/t

[treestar]

29. FAIL. Truman had a policy, this is a statute.

[wolfgirl]

6. NO appeal has been

filed. All DOJ did was request a stay of the Judge's order. DOJ has 60 days from the ruling to file an appeal - that has not happened. I believe they (DOJ) is dragging its feet for Congress to reconvene & vote. If the Def Auth Bill is passed - appeal would be moot as DADT would be repealed. If the bill fails, then the DOJ may not appeal.

ALSO, Pentagon has announced no one will be discharged without the decision being reviewed by civilian appointees of the Admin, in consultation with Secretary Gates....no longer can the lower echelon officers make these decisions.

Unlike Truman's executive order immediately integrating the military - there had been no LAW passed by Congress to impede him.
If Pres O issued an executive order, a GOP/TP'er controlled Congress could vote to over ride that order and a GOP/TP'er president could rescind the order entirely.

[boston bean]

9. The government intends to appeal the Court's decision.....

"The Justice Department has asked a federal court to put a hold on the judge's order this week that declared the military's "Don't ask, don't tell" policy unconstitutional.

"The Government intends to appeal the Court's decision. During the pendency of that appeal, the military should not be required to suddenly and immediately restructure a major personnel policy that has been in place for years, particularly during a time when the Nation is involved in combat operations overseas," said Clifford Stanley, Undersecretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness in documents filed this afternoon in a California federal court. The magnitude of repealing the DADT law and policy is demonstrated by the Department's ongoing efforts to study the implications of repealing DADT.""

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2010/10/14/5291879-obama-admin-to-appeal-dadt-ruling

So they lie in court to get an injunction of a ruling they agree with?

I just can't keep up.

[donco6]

10. I believe he would appeal it all the way to the S.C.

And that people here would defend that decision, which would result in the upholding of DADT.

[Balbus]

12. He's not much of a fighter, but I'm sure he'll make an exception in this case.

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[SidDithers]

18. Bullshit...nt

Sid

[boston bean]

19. I think that the obama admin appealed it is bullshit too! nt

[laughingliberal]

21. +1 nt

[NorthCarolina]

17. "Fierce advocate" is ONLY political rhetoric employed during a campaign

and should never, under any circumstances, be taken as "truth" when crossing the lips of a DLC New Dem. If it is populist speak, and is spoken by a New Dem, then you can pretty much rest assured that you are being fed a line of BS to win your vote. Remember their motto "Run left, govern right!".

[The Philosopher]

22. Doesn't

the Supreme Court have discretion of what case they hear?

[treestar]

28. Yes, where the government loses, it will appeal

THe Supreme Court can issue a final ruling on the subject.

So why not? Why are posters so afraid of the Supreme Court ruling? ARe they saying they believe the DADT is Constitutional? How ironic.