"Would the GOP prefer a judge overturn DADT?"

[Clio the Leo]

Yet another reason why Congress needs to fix this, not the courts. It's their mess, THEY need clean it up. Since, ya know, spines are all the rage lately.

Would the GOP prefer a judge overturn DADT?
Posted at 10:42 AM ET, 12/ 3/2010
By Adam Serwer

During yesterday's DADT hearings, Defense Secretary Robert Gates, Joint Chiefs Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen, and Pentagon General Counsel Jeh Johnson all emphasized the necessity of Congress repealing don't ask don't tell before a judge does. Raising the specter of "judicial activism," they pointed out that if Congress fails to repeal the policy, a judge's order would deny the military an opportunity to implement changes on its own terms.

The problem with that argument is it presupposes that Republicans wouldn't prefer to see DADT overturned by a judge. DADT is unpopular, and Republican senators opposed to repeal are sounding more and more like the die-hard segregationist Democrats of yore, insisting that the military hold a referendum on whether to repeal DADT -- Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) actually suggested that servicemembers be allowed to choose who they want to serve with.

<snip>

The White House strategy on repealing DADT was premised on minimizing the potential for a backlash by appeasing all the essential stakeholders -- Congress, the military, and activists committed to repealing the policy. But by blocking repeal and allowing a judge to declare the policy unconstitutional, Republicans could sidestep the argument over an unpopular policy by turning it into one about unelected judges imposing their will on the electorate.

That strategy may seem cynical, but it ultimately fits the die-hard opposition strategy Republicans have deployed for the past two years. If DADT repeal is inevitable, they might as well make sure it occurs on terms most favorable to them -- and that means being able to argue about the tyranny of activist judges, rather than the straightforward injustice of preventing patriots from serving openly simply because of who they are.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/12/would_the_gop_prefer_a_judge_o.html

Something to consider the next time you find yourself asking, "Why did Obama appeal the ruling?"

Call your Senators and tell them to vote in favor of repeal.
http://www.contactingthecongress.org/

[Skinner]

1. I think they would.

"That strategy may seem cynical." LOL. As if Republicans do anything these days that isn't cynical.

FWIW, to me it seems obvious that everything the Obama Administration has done on DADT is consistent with the goal of passing a legislative repeal (which is the Gold Standard, IMO, because it would be virtually impossible to undo). I still believe there is a good chance that Dems can get it done during the lame duck session. If not, then they can try repealing by other means.

[Johonny]

2. I think they would too

It's the Republican groups appeal that is likely to be heard first by the court. So Republicans would get to have it both ways. They are the ones that ended the program and at the same time they can run against activist judges. I see it as a win/win strategy for low info voters.

[northoftheborder]

3. They clearly are hoping for a court ruling in their favor....

They make no bones about wanting DADT to go to judges sympathetic to their views, and the Supreme Court, where they think they will win.

[UTUSN]

4. K&R #1 for yip they used the ProChoice way as a "judicial activism" bat to bash us with

ever since. And the revisionists have said it was a mistake to go the court route, that it should have been done state by state legislatures. I say more of our deadwood belief system is the fiction of states.