Justice Department Opposes Gay Veterans’ Request On Procedural Grounds

• metta
  
  Posts: 41946
  
  
  Jul 19, 2013 6:23 AM GMT

  Justice Department Opposes Gay Veterans’ Request On Procedural Grounds
  
  http://www.buzzfeed.com/chrisgeidner/justice-department-opposes-gay-veterans-request-on-procedura

  QUOTE REPORT SPAM
• Suetonius
  
  Posts: 1981
  
  
  Jul 19, 2013 6:13 PM GMT

  How nice. Obama really supports equal rights for gays. Yeah, right.

  QUOTE REPORT SPAM
• Posted by a hidden member.
  Log in to view his profile
  
  
  Jul 19, 2013 10:32 PM GMT

  Suetonius saidHow nice. Obama really supports equal rights for gays. Yeah, right.

  
  
  Did you even bother reading the article? The DOJ's objections were based on technical legal issues.
  
  An attorney for the plaintiffs said, “We appreciate that DOJ has agreed with us that each of the statutory provisions we challenged is unconstitutional, and are working with DOJ lawyers to find a solution that will provide our Plaintiffs with all the benefits they would have received if their application for benefits had not been unconstitutionally denied.”

  QUOTE REPORT SPAM
• Posted by a hidden member.
  Log in to view his profile
  
  
  Jul 20, 2013 12:32 AM GMT

  Suetonius saidHow nice. Obama really supports equal rights for gays. Yeah, right.

  
  
  HM Queen Elizabeth II, has done more for gay rights than Obama ever has. But then she does not have to lie about supporting gay marriage to get votes either.
  
  Long live Our Queen.

  QUOTE REPORT SPAM
• Suetonius
  
  Posts: 1981
  
  
  Jul 20, 2013 3:08 AM GMT

  Ex_Mil8 said

  Suetonius saidHow nice. Obama really supports equal rights for gays. Yeah, right.

  
  
  Did you even bother reading the article? The DOJ's objections were based on technical legal issues.
  
  An attorney for the plaintiffs said, “We appreciate that DOJ has agreed with us that each of the statutory provisions we challenged is unconstitutional, and are working with DOJ lawyers to find a solution that will provide our Plaintiffs with all the benefits they would have received if their application for benefits had not been unconstitutionally denied.”

  
  Of course I read the article. Not unlike your UK, the president here (like your PM, I believe) has plenary power over his administration. The attorney general (or the chief counsel for the veteran's administration) does not take positions contrary to policy of the administration. The government's attorneys do not have to raise "technical issues." In a case with such major policy considerations, the white house is briefed, and approves positions the government will take. If the president determines that a particular position should be taken in litigation, it will be taken, technical issues notwithstanding. If the president so determined, policy would have been adopted, and litigation would not have been necessary.

  QUOTE REPORT SPAM
• Posted by a hidden member.
  Log in to view his profile
  
  
  Jul 20, 2013 9:11 AM GMT

  Suetonius said
  Of course I read the article. Not unlike your UK, the president here (like your PM, I believe) has plenary power over his administration. The attorney general (or the chief counsel for the veteran's administration) does not take positions contrary to policy of the administration. The government's attorneys do not have to raise "technical issues." In a case with such major policy considerations, the white house is briefed, and approves positions the government will take. If the president determines that a particular position should be taken in litigation, it will be taken, technical issues notwithstanding. If the president so determined, policy would have been adopted, and litigation would not have been necessary.

  
  
  Obama has nothing to do with this case in any real way and the article makes it clear the DOJ is working with the plaintiffs to correct the system.
  
  It's a non-story.

  QUOTE REPORT SPAM
• Posted by a hidden member.
  Log in to view his profile
  
  
  Jul 20, 2013 3:52 PM GMT

  Ex_Mil8 said
  Obama has nothing to do with this case in any real way and the article makes it clear the DOJ is working with the plaintiffs to correct the system.
  It's a non-story.

  
  I agree, a non-story. This is just one of the many issues that are likely to arise from the DOMA decision and will need to be worked out 'technically' before decisions can be made. I'm sure there will be others that were enacted with verbiage that conflicts with the Supreme Court decision.
  
  How this all equates to a lack of support by the Obama administration is beyond me!

  QUOTE REPORT SPAM
• Posted by a hidden member.
  Log in to view his profile
  
  
  Jul 20, 2013 4:14 PM GMT

  eb925guy said

  Ex_Mil8 said
  Obama has nothing to do with this case in any real way and the article makes it clear the DOJ is working with the plaintiffs to correct the system.
  It's a non-story.

  
  I agree, a non-story. This is just one of the many issues that are likely to arise from the DOMA decision and will need to be worked out 'technically' before decisions can be made. I'm sure there will be others that were enacted with verbiage that conflicts with the Supreme Court decision.
  
  How this all equates to a lack of support by the Obama administration is beyond me!

  
  
  FYI, Holder took away your right to vote in 2009.

  QUOTE REPORT SPAM