DADT Ruled Unconstitutional

WOW! I have long believed that DADT was unconstitutional for a number of reasons - equal protection and the right to freedom from religious based discrimination being but two - and now a federal court has at last struck this vile law down. It's interesting that the judge ruled precisely on the 1st Amendment and Due Process clause issues - arguments I made to the Virginia Supreme Court in the Michael Moore case and which the Court refused to even touch. Obviously, the litigation is far from over, but it's a start and may ultimately lead to repeal faster than waiting for our worthless faux "fierce advocate" in the White House and Congress to act and call the law as rank religious based discrimination. As with Perry v. Schwarzenegger, in Court real evidence has to be used to defend discrimination and once again the proponents of bigotry failed to deliver. The Court's opinion can be found here: The Los Angeles Times has coverage (Elaine Donnelly no doubt must have wet herself upon hearing of the ruling). Here story are highlights:
*
A federal judge in Riverside on Thursday declared the U.S. military's ban on openly gay service members unconstitutional, saying the "don't ask, don't tell" policy violates the 1st Amendment and due process rights of lesbians and gay men.
*
U.S. District Judge Virginia A. Phillips said the policy does not preserve military readiness, contrary to what Justice Department attorneys and many supporters have argued, because evidence shows that the policy in fact has had a "direct and deleterious effect" on the armed services.
*
Phillips said she would issue an injunction barring the government from enforcing the policy. However, the Justice Department, which defended "don't ask, don't tell" during a two-week trial in Riverside, will have an opportunity to appeal that decision.
*
In her 85-page ruling, Phillips offered a scathing critique of the ban on gays serving openly. She noted that the military has since permitted more convicted felons to enlist and that both President Obama and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff have called for the repeal of "don't ask, don't tell."
*
The judge found convincing evidence that the military's own actions showed that having gays and lesbians in the service did nothing to impede military capabilities. The branches have routinely delayed discharging service members suspected of violating the policy until they have completed their deployments in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the number of discharges has declined significantly since the start of the Afghanistan war in 2001.
*
Phillips said the evidence showed that the "don't ask, don't tell" policy had harmed military capabilities. The policy has hindered recruiting efforts, led to the discharge of service members the military considers "critical" — including medical professionals and Arabic and Persian linguists — and has caused the military to enlist recruits who earlier would have been rejected because of their criminal records or lack of education or because they were out of shape, she said.
*
The policy also violates the right to free speech because heterosexual service members are free to state their sexual orientation, while homosexuals face discharge if they do the same, she said.
*
Phillips' ruling is expected to intensify political pressure in Washington to act on legislation to repeal "don't ask, don't tell" that remains stalled in the Senate despite support from Obama and the Democratic congressional leadership.
*
"I think it's a very, very interesting and sound opinion, and I think it will place a lot of pressure on Congress to move on this issue," said constitutional scholar Kenji Yoshino of the New York University School of Law. "From a gay rights perspective, it's a very exciting development." Yoshino predicted the case would be appealed all the way to the Supreme Court if Congress fails to act.