Looks like the Pentagon is going along with the injunction on DADT.

@Latrivia (2878)
United States
October 16, 2010 10:23am CST
Source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/14/AR2010101407018.html?hpid=sec-nation "The Pentagon announced Thursday that it will comply with a court order to stop enforcing its "don't ask, don't tell" policy barring gays from serving openly in the military, even as the Obama administration asked a federal judge to delay implementation of the ruling. " I was kind of expecting more of a fight. I can live with the administration asking for time, if it means they'll seriously go along with getting rid of DADT.
3 responses
@dark_joev (3034)
• United States
16 Oct 10
The judical branch is given the power to overrule the congress/people in some cases as their sole job is to keep the government in line with the words of the constitution as the constitution was created by the people as a contract on how they wanted government in their lives which was very very little of it. As for the DOD agreeing to end DADT they have been doing a study of sorts on how to go about making needed changes was supposed to get done until like December maybe they where ahead of scheduled on it and are ready to go about making any changes. I wonder if they will reinstate people back in who where kicked out under DADT and maybe make it an honorable discharge for the ones that can no longer serve.
@gewcew23 (8007)
• United States
16 Oct 10
Complying with a court order, kind of refreshing that the current executive branch is willing to comply with court orders after the previous executive branch resembled Andrew Jackson's administration's attitude towards the judicial branch.
@TTCCWW (579)
• United States
16 Oct 10
The administration wants congress to fix this and I am not sure that I disagree with that. Congress put this in motion and should repeal it. If it is left in the hands of a judge then we have to all listen to the argument of "legislating judges". I have read DADT and for the life of me I cannot figure out how it has not been over ruled by a judge or groups of judges long before this. It violates the constitution in so many ways that it is hard to decide which way to argue the issue.