Skip to main content

View Diary: Will President Obama (Continue to) Defend Bigotry? (76 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  asdf (2+ / 0-)

    Perhaps because the lawsuit over which she presided was not filed until 2009?

    [eyeroll]

    The Democratic Party. Never has so much been squandered so quickly for so little.

    by GayIthacan on Tue Oct 12, 2010 at 12:44:22 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  is it that simple? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      second gen, Montreal Progressive

      No one thought about suing over this until log cabin repubs did last year? Or did it just take 20 years to get to the right judge? That's really what I was asking, should have spelled it out.

      •  There have been a number of cases (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        DaleA, PsychoSavannah, esquimaux

        stretching back to the '70s challenging the constitutionality of forcing gays and lesbians out of the service solely based on their sexual orientation.

        DADT was a "compromise" in response to one of those case: it was sold to the American people and Congress as a humane solution: gays and lesbians could serve as long as they didn't admit to being gay.

        However, the military used DADT as an excuse to continue the witch hunts.

        I'm not a lawyer, so I may be off on the explanation, but another case: the Witt case, was also recently ruled on.

        http://www.dailykos.com/...

      •  asdf (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        PsychoSavannah

        Ah! Thank goodness!

        I was afraid I was going to have to act the history of the SCOTUS using sockpuppets!! :D :D :D

        This is actually the 3rd federal decision finding DADT Unconstitutional - but the first to actually rule it stop being enforced immediately. :D

        The Democratic Party. Never has so much been squandered so quickly for so little.

        by GayIthacan on Tue Oct 12, 2010 at 01:58:09 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site