Obama Administration Objects to “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” Injunction

Gov’t attorneys file objections to injunction that would halt military ban

U.S. Justice Department attorneys on Thursday objected to a proposed injunction being weighed by a federal judge in California that would halt the enforcement of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

The White House claims that the move by its administration’s lawyers adheres to the standard government protocol of defending an act of Congress from legal challenges, and that it no way reflects backpedaling on President Obama’s campaign commitment to repeal DADT.

Many LGBT equality advocates, however, see the Obama administration’s defense of the Department of Justice objections as just another example of the president’s perceived lack of commitment to fulfilling his promises to the community.

“We are not surprised by this but we are extremely disappointed with the Obama Administration," Log Cabin Republicans Executive Director Clarke Cooper said in a statement. "Many times on the campaign trail, President Obama said he would support the repeal of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.’ Now that it’s time to step up to the plate, he isn’t even in the ballpark."

U.S. District Court Judge Virginia A. Phillips, who ruled in a lawsuit filed by the LGBT group Log Cabin Republicans that the military’s ban on openly gay service members is unconstitutional, was asked by that organization to issue an a injunction that would halt further discharges under DADT worldwide. The Department of Justice lawyers filed their objections to the injunction in a Riverside, Calif., federal court, calling such a solution “untenable.”

The Obama administration’s attorneys suggested that the cessation of DADT’s enforcement could interrupt the flow of military operations in a time of war, and that any injunction should be limited to the 19,000 members of the Log Cabin Republicans.

Judge Phillips, whose ruling in the Log Cabin lawsuit pointed out how DADT violates soldiers’ consttutional protections, has indicated that she will order such an injunction.

What Do You Think?