12 Gays Sue Over 'Don't Ask'
BOSTON, Dec. 6, 2004


The Pentagon's "don't ask, don't tell" policy is being challenged by 12 homosexuals who have been separated from the military because of actions related to their sexual orientation.

They plan to file a federal lawsuit Monday in Boston that will cite last year's landmark Supreme Court ruling that overturned state laws making gay sex a crime as ground for overturning the policy.

Other courts have upheld the 11-year-old policy, but C. Dixon Osburn, executive director of the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, which is advising the plaintiffs, said those decisions came prior to the 2003 Supreme Court ruling.

"We think the gay ban can no longer survive constitutionally," he said.

Justin Peacock, a former Coast Guard boatswain's mate from Knoxville, Tenn., who is among the plaintiffs in the planned U.S. District Court lawsuit, was kicked out of the service after someone reported he was seen holding hands with another man.

"I would love to rejoin, but even if I don't get back in at least I could say I tried to get the policy changed," Peacock said.

Lt. Col. Joe Richard, a Pentagon spokesman, said officials have not seen the lawsuit and therefore could not comment on it.

"Don't ask, don't tell," put in place during the Clinton administration, allows gays and lesbians to serve in the military only if they keep quiet about their sexual orientation and abstain from homosexual activity. The Pentagon's previous policy barred homosexuals from military service.

The Supreme Court ruled last year that state laws making homosexual sex a crime were unconstitutional. That overturned an earlier Supreme Court ruling that had upheld sodomy laws.

Two other lawsuits challenging the policy have been filed since the high court's reversal.

One was brought in California by the Log Cabin Republicans, a political organization for gays. Osburn said that group could face a difficult fight because it is not bringing its suit on behalf of a specific injured party. He also noted a federal appeals court in California has upheld "don't ask, don't tell," but the appellate court for Boston has not ruled on the issue.

The other suit was filed in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims, which generally deals with cases that involve money. That plaintiff, who was separated from the Army, is seeking to recover his pension and is challenging the ban in the process. Osburn said the court might rule narrowly on the financial claim and not on the constitutionality of the gay members policy.

So I don't get it. Coudl someone simplify this for me?

What don't you get?

To me it's fairly simple. Twelve courageous people are challenging the constitutionality (or lack thereof) of Bill Clinton's half-assed policy for LGBTQ people in the military.

The way I understand it Psyadam - is that gays in the military were supposed to find some little safety measure in the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" atmosphere. They were supposed to be left alone, unless they were openly flaunting their homosexuality.

Of course, that didn't happen. What did happen was that the searching for evidence to prove someone gay did continue, so that something so innocuous as hand holding could cost a soldier their career.

Did you know, for instance, that six qualified Arabic translators, who happened to be LGBTQ, were summarily dismissed from the service - dishonorably discharged earlier this year? When directly asked (violation of the Don't Ask Don't Tell order - but consistent with high security clearance) they confessed to being gay. So the message here is boys and girls - we don't need to understand the enemy that badly - not if the translator is gay.

Now - since the Supreme Court has struck down the so called sodomy laws as unconstitutional - gay soldiers are going to sue the government to secure their rights to serve in the US military as openly gay Americans.

At least, this is the way I understand it.

From The Log Cabin Republicans:

As we enter the holiday season, the temperature may be dropping, but things are just beginning to heat up in our efforts to overturn the military’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy, and Log Cabin needs your help-TODAY!


Log Cabin filed its challenge to the discriminatory policy on October 12, 2004. The government will respond to our historic lawsuit in a matter of days and the battle will begin. Despite the need to support the men and women in our Armed Forces, the government already has contacted our legal team to inform them they will fight Log Cabin's challenge to the policy.


Log Cabin and our brave active duty service members are lucky enough to have a talented legal team at White & Case representing us in this historic lawsuit. We are thankful that White & Case is donating its attorneys' time for our challenge. However, attorneys' time is just but one element of our constitutional challenge. Our lawsuit requires Log Cabin to pay for expert witnesses, research, studies and other related expenses. In a challenge as important and historic as this, these costs are substantial. Log Cabin is totally committed to providing every resource to our legal team to enable it to demonstrate to the Courts that our Nation's brave men and women in uniform will receive the absolute best representation. Log Cabin needs to raise $50,000 by December 31st to help defer the costs associated with this lawsuit.


We know there are many wonderful organizations and charities seeking your financial support during the holidays. We hope you will consider helping Log Cabin as we work to protect the service members who protect all of us.


May God Bless America and protect our troops.

I applaud the Log Cabin Republicans for taking on this fight, if someone is willing to fight for their country, they damn well deserve to do that as a PROUD EQUAL CITIZEN.
I doubt the Supreme Court will rule that the military can't discriminate, they rarely challange the "special" laws the military insists upon.
With the lackluster recruiting going on currently, the military would be lucky to have us(LGBT).
My younger queer brothers and sisters, even if you desire a military career,I'd postpone that decision for atleast 4 years, Bush is a lousey commander in chief, and not worth your sacrifice.

With Rehnquist still on the bench, Don't Ask, Don't Tell, likely will not be overturned. Then again, they do need more soldiers, overturning this may encourage more gays to sign up.

It may also discourage good ole boys from signing up. I'm mot sure which would yield more soldiers but I'd guess the status quo, majority wins this one too.

Bravo to the Repub Log Cabin org for taking this on!

On a side note, to better understand some of the issues at play here, read Randy Shilts' Conduct Unbecoming. LGBTQ discrimination has been rampant and horrid in the military.

Alan Schindler
Barry Winchell
Grethe Cammermeyer

3 good reasons to BE ALL THAT YOU CAN BE.............somewhere else!

There is buzz Rehnquist has one foot in the grave and may not make it past
Christmas. I wonder why so many people in the DC area are getting cancer.
It seems epidemic.

I hope that whomever is appointed CJ will stand up to Bush

I know if I was put in power my views would come center to everything

handing down landmark world changing opinions changes anyone