Kevin And Don Respond To Being Self Loathing

Looking back at their journey from the Stonewall Democratic Club to Log Cabin Republicans, they claim it was one that was actually started by the democrats. After being told that marriage as not a priority on the agenda in 1995, they became disillusioned with the DEMS. For a decade they felt like they did not belong until they met the republicans of the Log Cabin Republican Club and discovered they too shared a dream of marriage equality. This blog is now a digital time capsule of their time as Republicans and moderated by a friend and supporter.

Wednesday, June 02, 2010

Log Cabin Republicans v. USA Challenge to "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" #DADT To Proceed Despite Obama's Attempt To Dismiss DADT Lawsuit

Log Cabin Republicans v. United States of America

'Don't ask, don't tell' suit will go forward
Bob Egelko, Chronicle Staff Writer

Saturday, May 29, 2010

The battle over gays and lesbians in the military shifted to the courts Friday when a federal judge in Southern California rejected the Obama administration's attempt to dismiss a lawsuit challenging the "don't ask, don't tell" policy.

President Obama has pressed for repeal of the 1993 law that prohibits military service by homosexuals who reveal their sexual orientation. On Friday, the House passed a defense bill that would revoke the law and change the policy once the Pentagon completes a review of its impact. The Senate is expected to consider the bill this summer.

In the meantime, the Obama administration is defending the law in court against a suit by the Log Cabin Republicans, a gay-rights organization, which argues the ban is a discriminatory and irrational measure that serves no legitimate military purpose.

While agreeing that the law is discriminatory, the administration argues that Congress could reasonably decide that openly homosexual soldiers would weaken the armed forces. In seeking dismissal, however, government lawyers argued that the Log Cabin Republicans had no right to sue because they had not identified any members who were threatened with discharge under the policy.

U.S. District Judge Virginia Phillips of Riverside disagreed. She said one of the organization's members, identified in the suit only as John Doe, is an Army reserve officer who served in Iraq and faces discharge if he reveals his name.

"This case presents the rare set of circumstances in which anonymity is appropriate," Phillips said. She said the government has argued that John Doe's name is essential to the suit but has refused to promise to protect him from discharge.

She also rejected the administration's argument that the law must be upheld if it has any rational justification. Phillips said she intends to use a more exacting standard, based on a 2008 federal appeals court ruling, requiring the government to show that its intrusion on the private lives of gays and lesbians is necessary to promote an important public interest.

The case could go to trial in July.

E-mail Bob Egelko at begelko@sfchronicle.com

This article appeared on page A - 5 of the San Francisco Chronicle

© 2010 Hearst Communications Inc.