New Study Says Obama Can Halt Gay Discharges With Executive Order

Military Law Experts Chart Course to End 16-Year Ban

SANTA BARBARA, Calif. — A study released today by a team of military law experts shows that the president has the legal authority to end gay discharges with a single order. The idea of ending the ban by executive order has gained momentum in the wake of news that mission-critical personnel, including Arabic language speaker Dan Choi, continue to be fired under the Obama administration because they’re gay. Congressman Rush Holt endorsed an executive order to end the ban on Saturday and National Security Adviser James Jones was asked about it by George Stephanopoulos on Sunday morning. The report, “How to End Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell: A Roadmap of Political, Legal, Regulatory, and Organizational Steps to Equal Treatment,” is sponsored by the Palm Center at the University of California, Santa Barbara.

Many have argued that only Congress can lift the ban on service by openly gay troops. But according to the study, Congressional approval is not needed. Dr. Aaron Belkin, Director of the Palm Center and a study co-author, said “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. This study provides a recipe for breaking through the political deadlock, as well as a roadmap for military leaders once the civilians give the green light.”

There are three legal bases to the president’s authority, the report says. First, Congress has already granted to the Commander in Chief the statutory authority to halt military separations under 10 U.S.C. 12305, a law which Congress 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 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.”

Diane H. Mazur, Professor of Law at the University of Florida College of Law and another study co-author, said the presidential authority to stop firing gay troops, known as “stop-loss,” is different from the highly unpopular stop-loss policy that the Army recently announced it would phase out. “That use of stop-loss forcibly extends service by those who wish to leave the military,” she said, “whereas suspending discharges for homosexuality would do the opposite: allow ongoing service by those who wish to remain in uniform.” The study says the provisions of the stop-loss law, which are granted by Congress, are “sensible because they give the President authority to suspend laws relating to separation when a national emergency has strained personnel requirements.”

The other four authors of the study in addition to Mazur and Belkin are Dr. Nathaniel Frank, a Palm researcher and author of “Unfriendly Fire: How the Gay Ban Undermines the Military and Weakens America”; Dr. Gregory M. Herek, Professor of Psychology at the University of California, Davis; Dr. Elizabeth L. Hillman, Professor of Law at the University of California Hastings College of the Law; and Bridget J. Wilson, who practices law at Rosenstein Wilson & Dean in San Diego. The report will also be published in a forthcoming book, “Department of Defense Social Policy Perspectives 2010,” edited by James Parco, David Levy and Fred Blass.

The Palm Center is a research institute at the University of California, Santa Barbara. The Center uses rigorous social science to inform public discussions of controversial social issues, enabling policy outcomes to be informed more by evidence than by emotion. Its data-driven approach is premised on the notion that the public makes wise choices on social issues when high-quality information is available. For more information, visit www.palmcenter.ucsb.edu * Tags = gay men gay news lesbian news transgender bisexual

Published by

Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/05/new-study-say…

Gay Military Ban Architects Admit Deception

And last night, things got even more interesting when Dr. Nathaniel Frank, senior research fellow at the Palm Center, went on MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow Show and said “don’t ask” advisors now admit the policy was a deliberate deception based on no empirical evidence.
Frank, author of Unfriendly Fire: How the Gay Ban Undermines the Military and Weakens America, told openly lesbian Rachel Maddow that military advisors to Clinton have admitted to the deception.
“They said it was based on nothing,” Frank told Maddow. “It was rooted in their own prejudices and fears. They even said they didn’t know what sexual orientation meant.”
“Instead they crated this unit cohesion argument. Which is the idea that openly gay service will somehow undermine unit cohesion and that you have to force service members to lie in order to preserve unit cohesion. Instead of the other way around, that forcing people to lie actually has its own impact on unit cohesion.”
Frank agreed with Maddow’s statement: “A key advisor to this panel admitted full-stop that the unit cohesion argument was completely made up out of whole cloth.” See Gay Military Ban Architects Admit Deception
On Top Magazine * Tags = gay men gay news lesbian news transgender bisexual

Published by

Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/03/gay-military-…

Experts Question Obama Plan to Consult Military on Gays, Consultations Could Backfire As In 1993

Some experts are questioning President Obama’s effort to consult with military leaders as he plans to repeal the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy. The AP reported today that Obama “has begun consulting his top defense advisers on how to lift a ban.” But Dr. Nathaniel Frank, author of a new book on the policy, says that “Last time political leaders consulted with the military on this issue, the brass still claimed they had not been consulted, and the result was a disaster. Remember, Clinton insisted he was consulting on how, not whether, to lift the ban, and even so, we got ‘don’t ask, don’t tell.’”

Frank’s new book presents never-reported evidence indicating that military officers who wrote the blueprint for “don’t ask, don’t tell” based the policy “on nothing” but their “own prejudices and fears.” The book, “Unfriendly Fire: How the Gay Ban Undermines the Military and Weakens America,” which was released today, contains the largest collection of evidence showing openly gay service does not undermine military effectiveness. Frank is Senior Research Fellow at the Palm Center at the University of California, Santa Barbara.

Last month, a retired Marine Corp General questioned a similar Obama administration proposal to study “don’t ask, don’t tell.” “There’s been enough studying throughout the years,” said General Hugh Aitken. “Creating a new study will not change the facts.”

Published by

Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/03/experts-quest…

Marine General Questions Obama Plan to Study Gay Ban, Scholars Concur that More Study is Unnecessary and Could Have Political Costs

SANTA BARBARA, Calif. — A retired Brigadier General for the U.S. Marine Corps has questioned the Obama administration’s plan to form a Pentagon commission to study “don’t ask, don’t tell.” “There’s been enough studying throughout the years,” said General Hugh Aitken. “Creating a new study will not change the facts.” Aitken participated in a comprehensive 2008 review of the policy which found that there is no evidence showing that openly gay service would harm the military, and a great deal of evidence showing it would not.

According to a February 1st Boston Globe report, the Obama administration has decided not to move forward on repealing “don’t ask, don’t tell” until the Pentagon can “undertake a detailed study of how a change in the policy would affect the military.” This may not happen for several months or longer, says the Globe article.

But scholars echoed General Aitken’s argument. Dr. Nathaniel Frank, senior research fellow at the Palm Center and author of the forthcoming book, Unfriendly Fire: How the Gay Ban Undermines the Military and Weakens America, said he has reviewed “all of the evidence on gays in the military, and there is simply no question about whether or not a policy change would undermine unit cohesion. It would not.”

Dr. Laura Miller, a well-respected military sociologist who co-authored a study on gays in the military with the late Charles Moskos, author of the gay ban, said, “you don’t need a commission to tell you that you need to retain every able, trained, experienced and productive member at a time when both the stakes and the manpower needs are high.”

Dr. Gary Gates, a UCLA scholar who has authored a number of studies on gays in the military, agreed that “the proposal to study ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ yet again seems unnecessary. Extensive scholarly research already shows that allowing the 65,000 gays and lesbians currently in uniform to serve openly will not harm the military in any way.”

Professor Diane Mazur, a former Air Force officer who teaches at the University of Florida and who has published widely on gays in the military, added that “every research study published over the last fifteen years has concluded that military readiness is not harmed — and may be strengthened — when all qualified Americans can serve and no one has to live in secrecy.”

Relevant research includes an extensive 1993 study by the RAND corporation as well as two official military studies: a 1989 study by the Defense Personnel Security Research Center and the Navy’s 1957 Crittenden report. It also includes numerous academic studies published in leading military journals such as International Security, Armed Forces and Society, and Parameters, the official journal of the U.S. Army War College. Most recently, a bi-partisan panel of retired flag officers, which included General Aitken, released a report last year which found that “don’t ask, don’t tell” was unnecessary and harmful to the military. All these studies reached the same conclusion: that allowing open gay service would not undermine the military.

Frank’s new book, which is being called the definitive story of “don’t ask, don’t tell,” chronicles the history of the 1993 debates over gay service and shows that, even then, the word “study” quickly became code for “delay and kill.” “Sam Nunn said any review of the gay ban should begin with a ‘Pentagon study’,” said Frank. “Colin Powell said the president should move cautiously and ‘study’ the issue; Bob Dole said the president should appoint a ‘study commission’; and ultimately President Clinton called for a 6-month ‘study’ period. The result was ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ which has made no one happy. I think there’s a lesson here.”

Dr. Aaron Belkin, director of the Palm Center and a nationally recognized expert on gay service, said that President Obama has stroke-of-the-pen authority to suspend gay discharges because, while the law mandates discharge if a “finding” is made of homosexual conduct, nothing in the law requires that such a finding be made. Given CNN’s December 2008 poll showing 81 percent public approval for open gay service, Belkin said, Obama should not hesitate to end the policy by executive order.

“Ironically, Obama’s careful effort to avoid Clinton’s mistakes could cause him to repeat them,” he said. “When President Clinton called a time-out to study the situation, that allowed opposition forces time to rally. In some cases, the Pentagon just needs to be told what to do.” Belkin said he has been told privately by top military officials that in cases like this one, they often prefer to be told what to do. “They know it’s the right step,” he said, “and sometimes they’d rather it be made for them.”