Military

The week ahead: September 19, 2011

0
September 19, 2011

Here's what coming up this week: Monday, September 19 – Deadline for paper proposals to present at the next Feminist Legal Theory conference at Emory Law. The theme for the next session is "Structuring Resilience, which will examine "the political and theoretical possibilities inherent in thinking about justice and state responsibility in terms of human vulnerability.” […]

Read more →

Re-enlistment uncertain for those discharged under DADT

1
September 5, 2011

The next wave of DADT-related litigation will be from those whom the military expelled. From today's N Y Times (excerpted): …[M]any gay men and lesbians who were discharged under the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy say they want to rejoin the service, drawn by a life they miss or stable pay and benefits they could […]

Read more →

Will Log Cabin challenge to DADT continue?

0
September 1, 2011

You might wonder why a court case challenging a dead and almost buried law has a need to continue. The main reason lies in what one could call DADT’s collateral damage: the ongoing claims by those who were discharged under it in the past to compensation and restitution of benefits.  The Ninth Circuit will hear […]

Read more →

The ignominious end of DADT

1
July 22, 2011

Below is the document signed today that will repeal DADT on September 20. Click on text to enlarge -

Read more →

Playing DADT bingo

0
July 17, 2011

When the Ninth Circuit motions panel reinstated the injunction against enforcement of DADT in Log Cabin Republicans v. Panetta, it looked like the judiciary might end the policy before the DADT Repeal Act would.  Now that the Justice Department has persuaded the same court to stay the injunction again (with the caveat that no investigations or discharge […]

Read more →

Ninth Circuit tells DoJ to fish or cut bait on DADT + Added commentary

0
July 11, 2011

In an order today, the Ninth Circuit panel assigned to hear Log Cabin Republicans v. Panetta directed the Department of Justice to declare whether it is going to defend the constitutionality of DADT and, if not, suggested that the court will either invite an amicus – probably Congress – to serve that function or will declare […]

Read more →