Posted on 07/08/2003 2:21:21 PM PDT by ewing
Citing the precedent set by the US Supreme Court ruling in the Texas sodomy case, a decorated Vietnam Combat Veteran filed suit late yesterday with the US Court of Federal Claims challenging the constitutionality of the 'don't ask, dont tell' policy.
The challenge filed by LTC Steve Loomis, who was ousted from the Army for being gay just 8 days prior to his 20 year retirement date in 1997, also challenges the federal anti sodomy statute covering the military.
The lawsuit is based on the recent US Supreme Court opinion in Lawrence v. Texas which declared that the Texas Sodomy Statute violated the Consitiution's guarantee of the right to privacy. Loomis suit seeks to reverse the discharge.
The challenge is the first of several likely to be filed in the wake of Lawrence according to the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network.
'Lawrence has a direct impact on the federal sodomy statute and the military's gay ban, said SLDN Executive Director C. Dixon Osbourne.
(Excerpt) Read more at advocat.com ...
WASHINGTON-- . . . 21 members of Congress issued an appeal to Defense Secretary William Cohen last week to reverse the "other than honorable" discharge handed to a decorated 20-year Army veteran for homosexual conduct.
50-Year-old Lt. Col. Steve Loomis was discharged for "conduct unbecoming an officer" one week before he reached his 20-year active-duty career mark. He enlisted in the Army at the height of the Vietnam War in 1967 and received a Purple Heart and two Bronze Stars for his service. The discharge disqualified him from full retirement, and he was summarily denied both his pension and benefits.
The Washington Post reported in July the troubles of Army Lt. Col. Steve Loomis were just beginning when a soldier burned down his off-base home last year. A fire marshall investigating the ruins found a sexually explicit video cassette featuring Loomis and three other men. Rather than returning the video to Loomis, the marshall passed the information along to Army officials.
The fire was set by Army Pvt. Michael Burdette who met Loomis two years ago and had posed for nude photos in Loomis' home. The Post said that Burdette wanted to retrieve the photos, and failing that, burned down the house in an attempt to destroy them. The fire marshall investigating the blaze reportedly took the video from a standing camera in hopes it might provide clues as to the arsonist's identity.
Reps. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), Connie Morella (R-Md.) and 19 other members of Congress signed a letter which said it appeared the Army violated "don't ask, don't tell" regulations in its prosecution of the case. The letter also said that it appeared to the undersigned that Lt. Col. Loomis "has been treated in a grossly unfair and almost vindictive manner."
C. Dixon Osburn of the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network said that the Army made numerous violations of its own policies in its handling of the Loomis case. Said Osburn, "His command decided for whatever reason that he should be discharged and that he should be slammed hard."
* * * * *
An officer taking kinky photos of a nude enlisted male soldier? Even without the sodomy that would be enough to get the jerk kicked out.
Too bad. So sad. No cookie for Stevie. Good riddance.
If he came out eight days before retirement and was not discharged, that would have opened the door for a subsequent claim of selective enforcement of "don't ask, don't tell," by someone else. Actually, I'm inclined to think this was a set-up, with the latter goal in mind. Just my hunch.
Members of Congress Appeal on Behalf of Gay Veteran
Tuesday, 12 August 1997
WASHINGTON -- The Washington Blade reports 21 members of Congress issued an appeal to Defense Secretary William Cohen last week to reverse the "other than honorable" discharge handed to a decorated 20-year Army veteran for homosexual conduct.
50-Year-old Lt. Col. Steve Loomis was discharged for "conduct unbecoming an officer" one week before he reached his 20-year active-duty career mark. He enlisted in the Army at the height of the Vietnam War in 1967 and received a Purple Heart and two Bronze Stars for his service. The discharge disqualified him from full retirement, and he was summarily denied both his pension and benefits.
The Washington Post reported in July the troubles of Army Lt. Col. Steve Loomis were just beginning when a soldier burned down his off-base home last year. A fire marshall investigating the ruins found a sexually explicit video cassette featuring Loomis and three other men. Rather than returning the video to Loomis, the marshall passed the information along to Army officials.
The fire was set by Army Pvt. Michael Burdette who met Loomis two years ago and had posed for nude photos in Loomis' home. The Post said that Burdette wanted to retrieve the photos, and failing that, burned down the house in an attempt to destroy them. The fire marshall investigating the blaze reportedly took the video from a standing camera in hopes it might provide clues as to the arsonist's identity.
Reps. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), Connie Morella (R-Md.) and 19 other members of Congress signed a letter which said it appeared the Army violated "don't ask, don't tell" regulations in its prosecution of the case. The letter also said that it appeared to the undersigned that Lt. Col. Loomis "has been treated in a grossly unfair and almost vindictive manner."
C. Dixon Osburn of the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network said that the Army made numerous violations of its own policies in its handling of the Loomis case. Said Osburn, "His command decided for whatever reason that he should be discharged and that he should be slammed hard."
Yep, good catch. I withdraw my earlier speculation.
President Clinton lifted the ban on security clearances by executive order issued sometime in his first term, and President Bush retained the executive order.
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.