Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Lesbian seeks reinstatement to Air Force in trial
Associated Press ^ | 9-12-10 | Gene Johnson

Posted on 09/12/2010 1:57:06 PM PDT by Justaham

Opponents of the "don't ask, don't tell" policy against gays serving in the military are hoping for another major legal victory as a federal trial begins Monday over whether to reinstate a lesbian flight nurse discharged from the Air Force Reserve.

The trial comes just days after a federal judge in California declared "don't ask, don't tell" an unconstitutional violation of the due process and free speech rights of gays and lesbians. While the ruling does not affect the legal issues in the case of former Maj. Margaret Witt, gay rights activists believe a victory—and her reinstatement—could help build momentum for repealing the policy.

"There's already political momentum to do something to repeal this unfair statute," said Aaron Caplan, a professor at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles who is on Witt's legal team. "Judicial opinions from multiple jurisdictions saying there's a constitutional problem with this ought to encourage Congress to act more swiftly."

Witt was a member of a squadron based at McChord Air Force Base near Tacoma when she was suspended in 2004 and honorably discharged. She challenged the constitutionality of her dismissal, and a federal appeals court panel ruled in 2008 that the military could not discharge service members for being gay unless it proved that the firing furthered military readiness.

The case was sent back to U.S. District Court in Tacoma for Judge Robert Leighton to determine whether Witt's firing met that standard. Several of Witt's former colleagues are expected to testify that she was an excellent nurse, and it was her dismissal—not her sexual orientation—that caused morale problems in the unit.

(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...


TOPICS: Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS: aclu; homosexualagenda

1 posted on 09/12/2010 1:57:08 PM PDT by Justaham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Justaham

I don’t know why but the term turf something comes to mind.


2 posted on 09/12/2010 1:58:01 PM PDT by Ancient Drive (DRINK COFFEE! - Do Stupid Things Faster with More Energy!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Justaham

We need to start applying tar and feathers to judicial activists


3 posted on 09/12/2010 2:01:10 PM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Justaham

Why have a Congress and President when we are ruled by Black Robes?


4 posted on 09/12/2010 2:03:10 PM PDT by Jacquerie (We live in a judicial tyranny - Mark Levin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Justaham

“a law professor at Loyola University Law school in Los Angeles”

Obviously doing the Lord’s work and representing Catholocism exactly how it would wish to be displayed in the legal sector... *rolls eyes*

These idiots need to fire themselves. That is, if they had any self-respect or decency.


5 posted on 09/12/2010 2:05:39 PM PDT by CaspersGh0sts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Justaham; 185JHP; AFA-Michigan; Abathar; Agitate; Albion Wilde; AliVeritas; Antoninus; ...
Homosexual Agenda Ping

Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the homosexual agenda ping list.

Be sure to click the FreeRepublic homosexual agenda keyword search link for a list of all related articles. We don't ping you to all related articles so be sure to click the previous link to see the latest articles.

Add keywords homosexual agenda to flag FR articles to this ping list.

The homosexuals are hoping for incrementalism. The November elections may change that trend. We need to take our country back and lead it down the path of sanity.

6 posted on 09/12/2010 2:16:19 PM PDT by DJ MacWoW (If Bam is the answer, the question was stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Justaham

“Justice Department lawyers representing the Air Force note that the case has put them in the position of defending a law neither the president nor the department itself believes is good policy.”

I’m sure they’ll do fine. Obama’s lawyers have proven proficient, not only at not enforcing laws they disagree with but also in forcing others to ignore them as well.


7 posted on 09/12/2010 2:17:33 PM PDT by tumblindice (I'm not licked yet," said the feisty nurse. "I know when I've been licked, and I've meted out a few)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Justaham

Kinda Cute in a Melanie Griffith sort of way...

8 posted on 09/12/2010 2:33:36 PM PDT by GRRRRR (He'll NEVER be my President, FUBO!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DJ MacWoW

anyone explain to me how the hell could this judge over in CA say don’t ask is unconstitutional according to the 1st and 5th amendment

I’ve read those amendments a bunch of times over this week and no where does it mention queers, acceptance into the military etc.
Also who does this judge think she is that she actually gives the Govt a week to get rid of it or she’ll make the law to accept them


9 posted on 09/12/2010 3:06:41 PM PDT by manc (WILL OBAMA EVER GO TO CHURCH ON A SUNDAY OR WILL HE LET THE MEDIA/LEFT BE FOOLED FOR EVER)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: manc

Quite simply the judge is driven by agendas and not law.


10 posted on 09/12/2010 3:27:41 PM PDT by DJ MacWoW (If Bam is the answer, the question was stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: DJ MacWoW
The homosexuals are hoping for incrementalism.

Incrementalism is what seems evident with complicit spineless or passive government officials helping the absurd process along... Take a morally devoid selfish pervert, label them with the "gay" progressive good housekeeping seal of approval and VOILA -we see a noble leftist cause -a sexual orientation justice initiative -a legally fought civil rights case in the making. All this premised upon how one CHOOSES to get their sexual gratification AND all this outside the authoritative domain of the elites attempting to impose it...

Federal Appeals Court Strikes Blow to "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" - May 22nd, 2008

-excerpt:

Yesterday afternoon the Federal Appeals Court for the 9th Circuit dealt a significant blow to the military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy. The ACLU of Washington represents a decorated Air Force Major, Margaret Witt, who was discharged for being in a relationship with another woman. In its decision, the court ruled that the Air Force must prove that discharging Major Witt is necessary for purposes of military readiness. While the court stopped short of striking down "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," it made it clear that following the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Lawrence v. Texas, the military has a much higher burden in justifying the ban:
We hold that when the government attempts to intrude upon the personal and private lives of homosexuals, in a manner that implicates the rights identified in Lawrence [v. Texas], the government must advance an important governmental interest, the intrusion must significantly further that interest, and the intrusion must be necessary to further that interest. In other words, for the third factor, a less intrusive means must be unlikely to achieve substantially the government's interest.

Obama Avoids Test on Gays in Military - May 19th, 2009

-excerpt:

WASHINGTON -- The Obama administration has decided to accept an appeals-court ruling that could undermine the military's ban on service members found to be gay.

A federal appeals court in San Francisco last year ruled that the government must justify the expulsion of a decorated officer solely because she is a lesbian. The court rejected government arguments that the law banning gays in the military should have a blanket application, and that officials shouldn't be required to argue the merits in her individual case.

The administration let pass a May 3 deadline to appeal to the Supreme Court. That means the case will be returned to the district court, and administration officials said they will continue to defend the law there.

The move "takes the issue off the front burner," as a trial and subsequent appeals could take years before the question returns to the Supreme Court, said an official familiar with the matter.

The decision comes as President Barack Obama attempts a balancing act on gay rights. He was elected with strong support from the gay community and promised action on a number of issues. But mindful of the complex politics, the White House has moved slowly.

Lesbian seeks reinstatement to Air Force in trial - Sep 12th, 2010

-excerpt:

Justice Department lawyers representing the Air Force note that the case has put them in the position of defending a law neither the president nor the department itself believes is good policy. Defense Secretary Robert Gates also favors repealing the 1993 law, which prohibits the military from asking about the sexual orientation of service members but allows the discharge of those who acknowledge being gay or are discovered to be engaging in homosexual activity.

Government lawyers nevertheless insist Witt's firing was justified—and that the panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals did not know the extent of her conduct when it sided with her in 2008. That conduct included a long-term relationship with a civilian woman, an affair with a woman who was married at the time and two earlier relationships with fellow servicewomen, Witt acknowledged in a deposition in May.

It was a 2004 e-mail from the husband of the married woman to the Air Force chief of staff, Gen. John Jumper, that prompted the investigation into Witt's sexuality.


11 posted on 09/12/2010 3:59:04 PM PDT by DBeers (†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: GRRRRR
Kinda Cute in a Melanie Griffith sort of way...

Kinda empty in a morally devoid sort of way. Definitely not officer material...

12 posted on 09/12/2010 4:00:27 PM PDT by DBeers (†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: GRRRRR; Justaham

Summary judgment for the Air Force. Ex post facto developments in law don’t change a valid prior ruling. Particularly when the new ruling isn’t a final judgment, but it only one circuit and on appeal.

Too bad considering her co-workers statement, “Several of Witt’s former colleagues are expected to testify that she was an excellent nurse, and it was her dismissal—not her sexual orientation—that caused morale problems in the unit”.

But it’s a simple question of legal procedure.

>>> Kinda Cute in a Melanie Griffith sort of way

I don’t see Melanie there. Melanie btw has totally destroyed her face with her addiction to plastic surgery. The major is more or less just an average person. Looking several minutes at the pic trying to “see” a celebrity, I just can’t think of one to compare her to.

Props (get it?) to her for accepting her gray hair. Speaks well of her emotional maturity. When my mom hit 40 she went prematurely blonde.

I’m sure she will find a safe landing in the civilian sector, probably for a much higher payrate. Good experienced nurses never lack a job if they want one.


13 posted on 09/12/2010 11:56:41 PM PDT by tlb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson