News

Obama Administration Again Submits Arguments to 9th Circuit Defending "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"

April 30, 2011

(Dallas, TX) – As Log Cabin Republicans gather for our 2011 National Convention to celebrate our victories over 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' and in the 2010 election cycle, the Obama administration today submitted arguments to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals continuing its defense of the ongoing policy.

"It is ironic that while liberals in Congress and in our community are attacking law firms for defending DOMA, which was passed with clear bipartisan support and signed by a Democratic president, they are silent about President Obama's Department of Justice continuing to present arguments to continue enforcement of 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell,'" said Log Cabin Republicans Executive Director R. Clarke Cooper. "Despite the President's fervent wish that Log Cabin Republicans v. United States would just go away, the case goes on and will go on until the threat of discharge is removed permanently. Log Cabin Republicans made a vow to stand up for our men and women in uniform, and that fight goes on today."

"Log Cabin Republicans v. United States is still alive and kicking in our court system, for very good reason," said Dan Woods, White & Case partner who is representing Log Cabin Republicans. "This case is necessary because discharges and investigations are still happening, it is necessary because we need to keep the pressure on to ensure that repeal actually happens, and it is necessary as insurance to set the precedent so that 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' can't come back. Log Cabin Republicans was willing to delay this appeal briefly while the certification process proceeds but only if the government agreed not to discharge any more servicemembers under DADT. It was and is unfortunate and inexplicable that government did not accept our proposal."

Log Cabin Republicans have maintained a three-front strategy against 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell,' lobbying for repeal in Congress, consulting with the Department of Defense, and filing suit in federal court. The case went to trial in July of 2010, and Judge Virginia Phillips ruled on September 9, 2010 that the policy violated the First and Fifth Amendments of the Constitution.