the don't tell show

9th Circuit Upholds DADT Stay Because Letting Gays Serve Openly Is a Change of ‘Magnitude’

In an eight-page decision, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals granted DoJ’s request to stay Judge Virginia Phillip’s DADT injunction until the government exhausts all appeals. How come? Because, the three-judge panel decided (with one judge dissenting), laws passed by Congress should be given the benefit of the doubt they are constitutional, and “the public interest in ensuring orderly change of this magnitude in the military — if that is what is to happen — strongly militates in favor of a stay.” The Log Cabin Republicans can now seek to have the Ninth Circuit hear the case or make an emergency request to the Supreme Court.

Get Queerty Daily

Subscribe to Queerty for a daily dose of #don'taskdon'ttell(dadt) #logcabinrepublicans #logcabinrepublicansv.unitedstatesofamerica stories and more


  • Brian Miller

    Ninth Circuit and Obama Administration to LGBT Americans:

    “Sit down, shut up and GO AWAY, faggots!”

  • Brian Miller

    The question now, being, “what are we going to do about this?”

    I’m sure there’s a plurality out there who want to slink back to Obama and beg forgiveness, expressing their willingness to be third-class sorta-citizens for another thirty years.

  • Devon

    Boy, I sure am fired up to go vote tomorrow…

  • B

    No. 1 · Brian Miller wrote, “Ninth Circuit and Obama Administration to LGBT Americans: …”

    Calm down. The Ninth Circuit Court is regularly dissed by the right wing for being too “liberal” and has made rulings favorable to gay rights. Read,+Ninth+Circuit…-a096893895 , which states:

    “In a ruling that advances legal protections for gays and lesbians, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has found that sexual orientation is ‘irrelevant’ in cases where on-the-job harassment constitutes ‘severe or pervasive unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature.”‘ (Rene v. MGM Grand Hotel, 305 F. 3d 1061 (2002).)

    “The September en banc ruling was considered a landmark victory for gay-rights advocates because federal civil rights law does not offer explicit protection from discrimination based on sexual orientation.”

  • Kev C

    We need more military heroes like Major Nidal Hasan to come out firing.

    Yes we can.

  • Brock Taner

    Doesn’t bother me.

    The military SUCKS! Let the straight boys get their balls blown off in a stupid war!

    At least it means more gays still alive for me to fuck!

  • reason

    It was obvious that would be the ruling, this is a non story to anyone in tune with reality. Went to a rally today with Sen. Leahy, Sen. Sanders, Rep Welch, and President Pro tempore Shumlin our current candidate for Governor. They all brought up the need for marriage equality and anti-discrimination something the democrats in VT have been delivering on. VP Joe Biden was applauding every time, give the White House the chance and they will stand and fight. DADT will be the tip of the iceberg for this administration.

  • ron

    DADT will be tied up in the courts for years, where it will be eventually upheld by a conservative-leaning Supreme Court. An unsympathetic Congress and an even more unsympathetic future Republican President will ignore the majority of Americans to repeal the policy. Best to forget about serving in a globally despised imperial force anyway.

  • rainfish2000

    Obama: Sugar-Coated Segregationist Views from a Slick-Talking Bigot in the White House…

    President Johnson, who pushed for, and signed, the 1964 Civil Rights Act for Blacks (even though he knew the Democrats would suffer grievously at the polls and would lose the South as many would defect to the Republican Party because of it)…Johnson would not have defended segregation like Obama. Johnson put not only his political career on the line, but the future of the entire Democratic Party. When asked why he stood up for Black civil rights when the majority of the country was either against racial equality or were indifferent to it, he said: “Because it was the right thing to do.”

    In a 2009 interview with NBCs Brian Williams, Obama noted marriage was a state issue that was not the providence of the federal government, and talked a little bit on how he would fight discrimination.

    Well, gosh, marriage was a state issue too when his own, interracial, parents’ marriage was outlawed in all of the Deep South and in many other states until 1967 when the US Supreme Court (Loving -v- Virginia) stated very clearly that marriage IS a constitutionally protected FEDERAL right.

    Hmmmm… And you were a constitutional law professor, Mr. Obama? I would say that would be hard to believe if I didn‘t already realize how being a politician transforms so many people with weak moral fiber into seasoned liars.

    I have no doubt that if Obama was Johnson, in the mid sixties, and if he was White, he probably would have come out in favor of allowing Blacks to sit at different tables just a little bit closer to the Whites in public restaurants — and then joyously proclaimed himself to be a great Civil Rights Champion of the era.

    Johnson did everything to make sure that even that kind of intolerable bullsh*t segregation (Obama would call it an “acceptable” compromise) didn’t even see the light of day in the Congress. And let’s not forget that, before President Johnson, Harry Truman desegregated the military in 1949 when the vast, vast majority of people were against it in America — unlike today, sixty years later, how +70% of the public are FOR lifting that immoral and unconscionable ban which prevents Gays and Lesbians service personnel from serving openly, with dignity and honor, in the US Armed Forces of 2010.

    So what do we get from Obama, even when all of the major public polls demand an end to discrimination — NOTHING! Such first-class leadership from our current “fearless” President — even when the polls are FOR ending discrimination. Obama is not a paragon of justice and virtue. It is all packaging. It is all hype. Even the Kool-Aid drinkers are beginning to see that he is no portrait in courage. He is no agent of “change you can believe in“.

    It is all an illusion created by a parasitic mass media dining on mass gullibility. A stop-loss order to end discharges under DADT should have been issued his first day in office. He had/has massive public support for it. One public statement that he believes DADT is unconstitutional from the executive office and the DOJ is under no obligation to appeal a federal court’s decision which has already struck DADT down as unconstitutional. No Republican administration in the future will revive DADT after Gay and Lesbian soldiers have served openly for years. That is not politically tenable — so an appeal by Obama’s DoJ is not justifiable by any convoluted logic they might try to BS you with.

    Obama is no man of vision and courage. He is nothing but a self-serving bigot and a moral coward of the vilest kind. He is NO different than the Dixie-crats in the Democratic party of the Deep South, in the 1960s, who made all kinds of promises to Black people about ending discrimination just to harvest their votes, and then did absolutely nothing after elected to office. Instead, they used the same familiar language, such as: It’s just not the right time for it…we have a war going on (WWII, Korea, Vietnam, etc.)….White people aren’t ready for it…there are other more important matters you know…don’t be selfish…don’t rock the boat…blah…blah…bs…bs…blah.

    So, we’ll see if the tens of millions of voters in the GLBT community give this homophobic assh*le a pass again in 2012. And please don’t give us that hackneyed old crap about how Republicans would treat us sooooo much worst. Any comparison is like saying: Well, after all, the Republicans beat the Queers up and Democrats don’t — they just either turn their heads the other way or watch with indifference, unless, of course they are Southern Democrats (DINO — Democrats in Name Only) who join gleefully in on the bashing with the Republicans.

    Also, don’t forget who gave us DADT and DOMA in the first place. If it was just the Republicans it would not have passed with a veto proof majority. Democrats were in control of the Congress in the first half of Clinton’s first term when DADT was passed, and significant numbers of Democrats were still in Congress, in the second half of Clinton’s first term, who gave their unqualified support to DOMA. And even if both bills passed without his signature and Congress overrode his veto, Clinton could have still vetoed those noxious discriminatory laws as a matter of principle. History would have honored him for it.

    So, a plague on both their houses — both Republicans and Democrats. When you have to choose between the lesser of two evils, guess what, you still end up with EVIL. That is not acceptable to anyone with a modicum of human decency.

    Likewise, if Obama thinks that we in the GLBT community should fight our battle for equality all on our own (unlike the support that Blacks got from President Johnson and the liberals in his party)…then fine, let him and the majority of Democrats get elected WITHOUT our help. F*ck them all!

    But that doesn’t have to leave us without representation. If a liberal Third Party could capture at least ten percent of the seats in the House, and even a few seats in the Senate, they could be powerbrokers and control the agenda; keeping both major parties in check. It is far past time to start thinking about THAT option seriously. No more free rides from the GLBT community.

    Earn our votes or do without them. It is a simple equation.

    ~ Bud Evans

  • adman

    Obama is cheap shit stacked high. At least he doesn’t back up his positions with his blackness. I say this since there are people I know who care about principles like a coherent identity, and stuff like the fact that people bled their life’s blood so we could all experience the privilege to live free, and they’re black. I know, stop the presses.
    Naw, Obama is working on a narrative for some crappy ass legacy flick from Hollywood starring Denzel or some other “big swinging dick” pseudo macho Christian breeder whore. Maybe he’ll write a book, and piss all over the Nobel prize while he jacks off to photos of dismembered Palestinian children, who knows? I’m not saying I believe the rumors of a seemingly innocent leader of a free nation and his proclivities for really freaky child necrophilia, I’m just sayin’. I’m gonna vote Dem in the midterms and then slam the shit out of a heavy bag for about 10 hours after, personally.

  • robert

    All this moaning. You know you have no choice but to vote Democrat.

  • Mike in London UK

    Whats all this “Ninth Circuit” stuff.

    Being a BRIT and not understanding your arcane legal practises and all, I would apprecate an explaination.

  • jason

    The Democrats will today learn that we don’t like having our strings pulled in a sleazy game of manipulation and lying to win our votes. The Democrats will learn today that our GLBT votes are not to be taken for granted anymore, and that you have to earn them.

  • Paul

    I am voting Present today. If the democrats continue to fight against my civil rights in court I am voting for Palin in 2012.

  • Trevor

    @Mike in London UK:
    In the U.S., the court system works as follows: cases concerning federal laws are first taken to a district court, of which there are 94. They can then be appealed to a circuit court, of which there are 13. The 9th covers the West Coast and Alaska, more or less. After the circuit courts, the case can be appealed to the Supreme Court.

  • Queer Supremacist

    @Paul: I’ll suck it up and vote for the homophobic white cracker breeder goy bitch over the homophobic half-cracker breeder goy son of a bitch.

    I will never vote for a Democrat ever again on any level, no matter what they do. Not even a gay one. And I am hoping the GOP impeaches Obama when they take over, and I don’t care why. I just hope when they do they remove him from office. Then the criminal proceedings can begin.

    If there is any justice, Saddam Hussein Obama will be the first president to leave office in handcuffs. And lyin’ Joe Biden, Stasi Pelosi, and the Mormon will go with him.

    Hatred of Democrats does not equal endorsement of Republicans.

    @rainfish2000: Your post makes me want to stand up and cheer. The Breedercrats and the BreedeRepublicans are the 21st Century Dixiecrats.

    It is time to start a gay political party that stands for total economic and social freedom, and calls for the use of military force against homophobia, both foreign and domestic.

  • Cam

    So Obama firing the general in charge of the entire war in Afghanistan because of a percieved insult is apparently not a change of magnitute, but allowing current soldiers to not have their civil rights violated is?

    Congress doesn’t give a benefit of the doubt to the courts, why is the 9th circut abdicating their responsibility as an equal branch of govt.?

  • B

    No. 19 · Cam wrote, “So Obama firing the general in charge of the entire war in Afghanistan because of a percieved insult is apparently not a change of magnitute, but allowing current soldiers to not have their civil rights violated is? Congress doesn’t give a benefit of the doubt to the courts, why is the 9th circut abdicating their responsibility as an equal branch of govt.?”

    1. Under the U.S. constitution, the president is the “commander and chief” and has every right to fire a general. See .

    2. The courts traditionally don’t rock the boat (i.e., maintain the status quo) while ruling on a decision were the outcome is not reasonably predictable.

    You may not like it, but that’s how it has always worked.

Comments are closed.