“Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” is back. At least until Monday:
Less than 24 hours after a federal judge refused to block an injunction against “don’t ask, don’t tell,” the U.S. court of appeals for the ninth circuit has done so — at least temporarily.
A three-judge panel ordered a stay requested by the Justice Department “temporarily in order to provide this court with an opportunity to consider fully the issues presented” in the federal lawsuit against DADT, waged by the Log Cabin Republicans since 2004.
It’s unclear whether the ruling by ninth circuit judges Diarmuid F. O’Scannlain, Stephen S. Trott, and William A. Fletcher was a unanimous one or a split decision.
The panel ruled that attorneys representing the Log Cabin Republicans may file an opposition to its stay of the injunction by Monday. “We will be filing a much more detailed opposition to the motion for full stay pending appeal,” said White and Case attorney Earle Miller, part of the legal team representing the gay Republican group in the lawsuit.
Metro Weekly’s Chris Geidner had it first. The ruling:
This court has received appellant’s emergency motion to stay the district court’s October 12, 2010 order pending appeal. The order is stayed temporarily in order to provide this court with an opportunity to consider fully the issues presented.
Appellee may file an opposition to the motion for a stay pending appeal by October 25, 2010. To expedite consideration of the motion, no reply shall be filed.
This does not immediately change the military’s policy of not enforcing DADT, as the Oct. 15 guidance from Undersecretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness Clifford Stanley stated that, while seeking a stay, “the Department of Defense will abide by the terms of the injunction” and stated that “additional guidance” would come if a stay is granted.
This also is not a stay of the order that will last through the appeal. This is only a temporary stay granted through the time when the Ninth Circuit can decide — sometime after the Oct. 25 deadline given to the LCR attorneys to respond to the stay request — whether to issue a stay pending the outcome of the appeal. The decision will likely come soon after the Oct. 25 submission by LCR because the court will not hear oral arguments in the case and stated in its order that the government will not be allowed to file a reply brief, which would happen in the ordinary course of appellate briefing.