Supreme Court rejects challenge to DADT

[HopeOverFear]

WASHINGTON (AP) - The Supreme Court on Monday agreed with the Obama administration and refused to review Pentagon policy barring gays and lesbians from serving openly in the military.

The court said it will not hear an appeal from former Army Capt. James Pietrangelo II, who was dismissed under the "don't ask, don't tell" policy.

The federal appeals court in Boston earlier threw out a lawsuit filed by Pietrangelo and 11 other veterans. He was the only member of that group who asked the high court to rule that the Clinton-era policy is unconstitutional.

"I think this decision is an absolute travesty of justice and I think every judge on this court should be ashamed of themselves," said Pietrangelo, who served six years in the Army, seven years in the Vermont National Guard and fought in Iraq in 1991. "It's nothing short of rubber stamping legalized discrimination, the same way Nazi Germany legalized discrimination against Jews.

"The Supreme Court is not infallible, they get things wrong, and they got it wrong this time," he said.

During last year's campaign, President Barack Obama indicated he supported the eventual repeal of the policy, but he has made no specific move to do so since taking office in January. Meanwhile, the White House has said it won't stop gays and lesbians from being dismissed from the military.

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."

[sui generis]

1. yep - we can do without this kind of "change"

I still think all 67,000 gays in the military should DO TELL.

The U.S. would finally be forced to deal with the issue or else reinstitute the draft, for heterosexuals only.

[HelenWheels]

2. Cowards

Harry Truman did away with segregation in the army and military discipline and cohesion survived just fine. Sure there were incidents where minorities were persecuted but that is where military discipline comes into play. I guess the military just doesn't measure up to the military in the Truman years.

[HamdenRice]

5. Point of information: Harry Truman tried to desegregate the Army and failed.

After he issued his executive order, the Army basically said, "No." General Omar Bradley -- who, incidentally was deeply admired by African American soldiers during World War II and was just below Ike in the chain of command during the war, and was Army Chief of Staff when Truman issued his executive order -- said the Army would be desegregated when American society was desegregated.

It was a blow to the civilian control of the military that the president issued and order and the Army ignored it.

The North Koreans "desegregated" the US Army several years later by overrunning its positions in the early months of the Korean War, decimating all white units and forcing the Army to restore operational strength to those units without regard to color.

[Kaleva]

6. From Wiki

"Starting with King Phillip's war in the 17th century, blacks fought and died alongside whites in an integrated environment in the North American colonies. They continued to fight in every American war integrated with whites up until the War of 1812."

"At the end of June 1950, the Korean War broke out. The U.S. Army had accomplished little desegregation in peacetime and sent the segregated Eighth Army to defend South Korea. Most black soldiers served in segregated support units in the rear. The remainder served in segregated combat units, most notably the 24th Infantry Regiment. The first months of the Korean War were some of the most disastrous in U.S. military history. The North Korean People's Army nearly drove the American-led United Nations forces off the Korean peninsula. Faced with staggering losses in white units, commanders on the ground began accepting black replacements, thus integrating their units. The practice occurred all over the Korean battle lines and proved that integrated combat units could perform under fire. The Army high command took notice. On July 26, 1951, the US Army formally announced its plans to desegregate, exactly three years after Truman issued Executive Order 9981."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desegregation

[HamdenRice]

9. Yeah, that's the "reality based" version of what happened

But the reality based version of history is not well liked around here. In the preferred version, Truman signed the executive order and the Army was immediately desegregated without the intervening three years.

[Crabby Appleton]

3. TITLE 10 > Subtitle A > PART II > CHAPTER 37 > § 654.

Policy concerning homosexuality in the armed forces

You're going to have to change 10 USC 654

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/10/usc_sec_10_00000654----000-.html

[William769]

7. That has absolutley nothing to do with this.

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."

[jenmito]

4. When I heard that I really couldn't understand...

WHY they don't just GET RID of DADT already. The VAST majority of people are for gay people serving openly in the military. It's a no-brainer to get rid of it. I hate to see people who WANT to serve not being ALLOWED to serve because of who they are.

[vaberella]

8. I don't know. I find this disconcerting as well Jen.

I'll wait on more info, before I make any crazy judgement calls.

[jenmito]

10. I really wish Obama would either

sign an executive order repealing DADT or would urge the Congress to take this up. It is the right thing to do.

[vaberella]

11. I believe he's urged the Congress, but their sitting on this.

So all that's left is the executive order and I have to wonder why he doesn't sign on it. I know he most likely has a valid reason however I have no clue what that would be.

[jenmito]

12. I'm afraid he's being too cautious...

afraid of being called a "radical liberal" or something and there are a few "experts" who seem not to be so willing to get rid of it (although there are many more who think it SHOULD be repealed). All he has to do is point out that Israel (as well as many other countries) allow gay people to serve openly.