Study: Obama doesn’t need Congress to halt gay discharges
05.12.2009 11:36am EDT
(Santa Barbara, California) A new study by a team of military law experts asserts that President Obama has the legal authority to end gay discharges through an executive order.
The report, “How to End Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell: A Roadmap of Political, Legal, Regulatory, and Organizational Steps to Equal Treatment,” was sponsored by the Palm Center at the University of California, Santa Barbara .The release of the study follows a weekend TV interview where retired Marine Gen. James Jones, the President’s national security adviser, said there has been “preliminary” discussion on allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly in the military.
But Jones went on to say that it uncertain whether “don’t ask, don’t tell” will be overturned, even though Obama has said he wants it eliminated.
Many have argued that only Congress can lift the ban. But according to the Palm study, Congressional approval is not needed, suggesting Obama is playing politics.
“The administration does not want to move forward on this issue because of conservative opposition from both parties in Congress, and Congress does not want to move forward without a signal from the White House,” said Aaron Belkin , Director of the Palm Center and a study co-author.
“This study provides a recipe for breaking through the political deadlock, as well as a road map for military leaders once the civilians give the green light.”
There are three legal bases to the president’s authority, the report said.
First, Congress has already granted to the Commander in Chief the statutory authority to halt military separations under a law titled, “Authority of President to suspend certain laws relating to promotion, retirement, and separation.”
Under the law, the President may suspend any provision of law relating to promotion, retirement, or separation applicable to any member of the armed forces who the President determines is essential to the national security of the United States during a “period of national emergency.”
The statute specifically defines a “national emergency” as a time when “members of a reserve component are serving involuntarily on active duty.”
The second and third bases of presidential authority are contained within the “don’t ask, don’t tell” legislation itself the study said.
The law grants to the Defense Department authority to determine the process by which discharges will be carried out, saying they will proceed “under regulations prescribed by the Secretary of Defense, in accordance with procedures set forth in such regulation.”
Finally, the law calls for the discharge of service members if a finding of homosexuality is made, but it does not require that such a finding ever be made.
According to the study, these provisions mean that the Pentagon, not Congress, has the “authority to devise and implement the procedures under which those findings may be made.”
The White House has not commented on the study.
Since DADT was enacted more than 12,000 servicemembers have been dismissed when it was learned they are gay. According to statistics from the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network which advocates for gays in the military an average of two service members are dismissed under the law every day.
Rep. Ellen Tauscher (D-Calif.) has reintroduced legislation to repeal DADT. Tauscher’s bill attracted 148 co-sponsors last year. This year the bill has not been taken up at the committee level.
A poll released April 30 found that by 56-37 percent voters think the ban should be repealed.




I’d like to see it done through legislation. I support the president’s plan.
MOST EDUCATED PEOPLE ALREADY KNOW ALL HE NEEDS TO DO IS SIGN AN EXECUTIVE ORDER…..THE ISSUE IS WHY IS HE RENEGING ON HIS CAMPAIGN PROMISE. WE MUST HOLD HIM TO HIS WORDS AND REPEAL DON’T ASK/DON’T TELL.
Well, not sure about you all but I can afford a Stamp A Week for a letter (just need to write nice or not so nice letter and print it weekly) and mail to the White House, also to Michelle Obama, heck I’m gonna write the Mother n law too, some black person in that place might realize and remember what it was like when Equality didn’t exist for them.
I remember when one of my grandparents told me that it was in the Bible that the “races aren’t suppose to mix” (everyone bought that Obama wouldn’t exist, white momma, black daddy would have been a NO NO) and it was in the Bible that “women should be having kids and not working out of the house.” I assume that meant Christian woman would be same as most of the women in the middle east.
So they need to be reminded that they (the Obamas) wouldn’t be there (in the WHITE HOUSE) if people around the world didn’t get past what SOME think the bible translates to, a bunch of hateful crock!
I agree with Chris Sullivan, I like Obama and still glad he got my vote, but IF he doesn’t give us something substantial this term (remove DADT or DOMA) then he won’t get my vote for his second term.
However, I won’t give it to a Right Wing Republican either, I’ll give it to someone like Denise Kucinich or A Party that REALLY cares about me!
Come on aren’t we beyond judging people’s abilities by their sexual orientation? Is the life of a gay soldier who dies for his country in Iraq worth less than that of a straight one? Of course not! Enough discrimination. Long live equality and the USA!
Trace, I supported Hillary, but you and I know her weakness is that she always seems to make herself look calculating and sneaky, and she has the unfailing ability to do so at the worst moments. (Maybe she’s growing out of that, I hope.)
As far as your observation of Obama, I can’t find a way to deny or counter it. His actions are just as homophobic as Dubya’s, if not more so. I don’t give half a fart about that damned easter egg roll–the man is so squeamish about gays that he should come out and say it. At least then we’d be done with the pretense that he will show any leadership.
Another thing, and it touches on comments that have been made here and in other threads. Obama acts like we have cooties, but it seems that he responds to public pressure. So it looks like we might get some support from him if we show him how pissed off we are–which also lends credence to the idea that he stands for whatever will keep him in office, and that it’s even more transparent with him than it ever has been with either Hillary or McCain. Time will tell.
Dan said: “A quick point – under DADT, the soldiers do receive honorable discharges…”
I can’t say definitively that this is the case with all instances of gays being dismissed, but in Lt.Choi’s case (who recently appeared on Rachel Maddow) he was informed that he would recieve a dishororable discharge if he chose to fight his dismissal.If he did not fight it, he would be given an honorable discharge. And while I’m not in the military I’d say it’s a pretty safe bet that this is what most service personel in his position are told. If they fear the loss of their post-service benefits with a dishonorable discharge it makes it easier for the military to get rid of them quietly. The military doesn’t want to deal with these dismissals becoming a big issue, as they would, I think, if more people were aware of just how many GLBT service members are actually being kicked out, many of them decorated combat veterans.
What ridiculous logic they employ. Go quietly, don’t fight for your rights and that will be honorable, but if you do fight for your rights and try to get justice that is deemed dishonorable. Insanity!
tjr, I think that Obama is afraid to be connected with any gay individuals.
At least we know that Hillary and McCain have gay advisers and staff. We even know that Hillary has participated in Pride Events.
Ask Obama if Obama has ever attended a Pride Event.
Again, when are the Obama-kins going to wake up.
While I believe it will be difficult if not impossible to get rid of DOMA, Obama most certainly should repeal DADT and pass the hate crimes legislation. Obama is taking a very cautious position on DADT, too cautious. Apparently he does not want to appear like he is shoving policies on the military and become vulnerable to attacks from conservatives like Clinton.
Some on here seem to think Hillary would have acted differently on gay issues. I find that hard to believe given she is equally as calculating if not more so than Obama. She also does not support same-sex marriage.