You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

It is complete and utter BS to say "Obama HAS to appeal DADT decision". [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
Statistical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-20-10 01:35 PM
Original message
It is complete and utter BS to say "Obama HAS to appeal DADT decision".
Advertisements [?]
Edited on Wed Oct-20-10 02:28 PM by Statistical
The DOJ has a duty to defend CONSTITUTIONAL laws. When the court renders a decision there is nothing that requires either party to appeal it. Routinely agents of the government (of all levels) accept the decisions of the court. Very few (less than 1/100th of 1%) of all cases ever get to the Supreme Court. Virtually all are settled at lower levels of the court. Obviously somewhere along the line one party decided not to pursue the issue further (or at the least accepts they have no reasonable chance of winning).

The judge laid out the specific reasons why DADT is Unconstitutional. He didn't just say "gays should serve because it would be nice". He said:

So Held: Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell Act violates Log Cabin members' substantive due process rights because it does not significantly further the Government's interests in military readiness and unit cohesion. The Act also violates Log Cabin members' free speech rights because its restrictions on speech are not only broader than reasonably necessary to protect the Government's substantial interests, but also impede military readiness and unit cohesion.


The administration could accept the decision of Judge Philips. They are not compelled to act against the pursuit of justice. They aren't compelled to blindly defend any and all laws no matter how unjust. Now if DOJ believes that "reasonable arguments" can be made to the Constitutionality of DADT then (and ONLY THEN) are they bound to vigorously defend it. The Obama administration hasn't defended every law challenged, no administration ever has. Defense of DADT indicates that at least some element of the administration believes the law IS CONSTITUTIONAL and are defending it with the intent to see that resolution. The idea they are def

I mean if Congress passed a law making slavery legal (or some other abomination of justice) is anyone going to sit here a exlaim that Obama has to defend a law making himself a slave? Really? I mean WTF people. Anyone defend the actions of the administration in this case are simply blind to any errors Obama can make not matter how egregious. It is beyond pathetic.

Edited for some horrible grammar (sorry I got worked up).

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC