One Step Closer
Dec. 14th, 2008 06:40 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
pecuniumIn May the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Lawrence v Texas meant the military couldn’t just discharge homosexuals. The court ruled that merely being gay (or having a “predisposition” to engage in homosexual conduct) isn’t justifiable grounds to discharge someone.
A week ago the case wasn’t granted an en banc hearing. That means that, barring the case being taken up by the Supreme Court (which the Air Force is likely to try to get), in the jurisdiction of the 9th Circuit, discharges for merely being gay can’t be processed.
If the AF does make the appeal, the Obama Administration could elect to withdraw it.
In practical terms, it doesn’t mean anything. All a service would have to do to discharge someone is transfer them outside the 9th Circuit’s jurisdiction. Sadly, because of the hullabaloo trying to get Art. 125 repealed (it takes an act of congress, and the signature of the president), the only way, in the foreseeable future to get it repealed will take either a concerted action on the part of straights in the military (since most of the people in the services violate the regulation... oral sex is part of sex in the US, and it’s forbidden to those who are in the services), or a court case.
A week ago the case wasn’t granted an en banc hearing. That means that, barring the case being taken up by the Supreme Court (which the Air Force is likely to try to get), in the jurisdiction of the 9th Circuit, discharges for merely being gay can’t be processed.
If the AF does make the appeal, the Obama Administration could elect to withdraw it.
In practical terms, it doesn’t mean anything. All a service would have to do to discharge someone is transfer them outside the 9th Circuit’s jurisdiction. Sadly, because of the hullabaloo trying to get Art. 125 repealed (it takes an act of congress, and the signature of the president), the only way, in the foreseeable future to get it repealed will take either a concerted action on the part of straights in the military (since most of the people in the services violate the regulation... oral sex is part of sex in the US, and it’s forbidden to those who are in the services), or a court case.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2008-12-15 03:27 am (UTC)I think most of the prosecutions for claiming homosexual orientation are under article 134, conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline.
no subject
Date: 2008-12-15 03:38 am (UTC)