Skip to main contentSkip to navigation
Hamilton Law Firm LLC
Hamilton Law Firm LLC

913-647-7512
Legal Question?

Menu
  • Home
  • Firm Overview
  • Attorney Profile
  • Practice Areas
  • Why Choose Us
  • Representative Work
  • Legal News
  • Contact Us

Practice Areas

Business Litigation
Legal Malpractice
Local Counsel
Medical Malpractice
Nursing Home Abuse
Personal Injury
Product Liability
Wrongful Death

For More Information

Fill out our online form

Home » Don’t Ask Don’t Te…

Don't Ask Don't Tell Policy Illegal

October 12th, 2010
Posted By
Patrick Hamilton
Tweet
SAN DIEGO – OCTOBER 12, 2010 A federal judge issued a worldwide injunction Tuesday stopping enforcement of the "don't ask, don't tell" policy, ending the military's 17-year-old ban on openly gay troops.

U.S. District Judge Virginia Phillips' landmark ruling was widely cheered by gay rights organizations that credited her with getting accomplished what President Obama and Washington Politics could not.

"This order from Judge Phillips is another historic and courageous step in the right direction, a step that Congress has been noticeably slow in taking," said Alexander Nicholson, executive director of Servicemembers United and the sole named veteran plaintiff in the case along with the Log Cabin Republicans.

Servicemembers United is the nation's largest organization of gay and lesbian troops and veterans.

U.S. Department of Justice attorneys have 60 days to appeal. Legal experts say the department is under no legal obligation to do so and could let Phillips' ruling stand.

Phillips declared the law unconstitutional after a two-week nonjury trial in federal court in Riverside. She said the Log Cabin Republicans "established at trial that the Don't Ask, Don't Tell Act irreparably injures servicemembers by infringing their fundamental rights."

She said the policy violates due process rights, freedom of speech and the right to petition the government for redress of grievances guaranteed by the First Amendment.

"Furthermore, there is no adequate remedy at law to prevent the continued violation of servicemembers' rights or to compensate them for violation of their rights," Phillips said.

She said Department of Justice attorneys did not address these issues in their objection to her expected injunction.

Before issuing her order, Phillips had asked for input from Department of Justice attorneys and the Log Cabin Republicans, the gay rights group that filed the lawsuit in 2004 to stop the ban's enforcement.

The Log Cabin Republicans asked her for an immediate injunction so the policy can no longer be used against any U.S. military personnel anywhere in the world.

"The order represents a complete and total victory for the Log Cabin Republicans and reaffirms the constitutional rights of gays and lesbians in the military who are fighting and dying for our country," said Dan Woods, an attorney for the Log Cabin group.

Government attorneys objected, saying such an abrupt change might harm military operations in a time of war. They had asked Phillips to limit her ruling to the members of the Log Cabin Republicans, a 19,000-member group that includes current and former military service members.

The Department of Justice attorneys also said Congress should decide the issue — not her court.

Phillips disagreed, saying the law doesn't help military readiness and instead has a "direct and deleterious effect" on the armed services by hurting recruiting during wartime and requiring the discharge of service members with critical skills and training.

Legal experts say the Obama administration could choose to not appeal her ruling to end the ban — but Department of Justice attorneys are not likely to stay mum since Obama has made it clear he wants Congress to repeal the policy.

"The president has taken a very consistent position here, and that is: 'Look, I will not use my discretion in any way that will step on Congress' ability to be the sole decider about this policy here," said Diane H. Mazur, legal co-director of the Palm Center, a think tank at the University of California at Santa Barbara that supports a repeal.

Tracy Schmaler, spokeswoman for the Department of Justice, said the government was reviewing Phillips' ruling Tuesday and had no immediate comment.

Gay rights advocates say they worry they lost a crucial opportunity to change the law when Senate Republicans opposed the defense bill earlier this month because of a "don't ask, don't tell" repeal provision.

If Democrats lose seats in the upcoming elections, repealing the ban could prove even more difficult — if not impossible — next year.

Woods said the administration should be seizing the opportunity to let a judge do what politics has been unable to do.

The "don't ask, don't tell" policy prohibits the military from asking about the sexual orientation of service members but bans those who are openly gay. Under the 1993 policy, service men and women who acknowledge being gay or are discovered engaging in homosexual activity, even in the privacy of their own homes off base, are subject to discharge.

By JULIE WATSON, Associated Press Writer Julie Watson, Associated Press Writer

Categories: Legal News

Practice Areas

Business Litigation
Legal Malpractice
Local Counsel
Medical Malpractice
Nursing Home Abuse
Personal Injury
Product Liability
Wrongful Death

For More Information

Fill out our online form

Recent Blog Posts

18
Negligence Lawsuits: What the Plaintiff Must Prove
February 18th, 2021
Negligence occurs when a party fails to exercise proper care and, as a result, damages occur. Laws surrounding negligence and liability vary from state to state, so it’s important to contact a Kansas and Missouri injury attorney to represent your c… Read More
6
Legal Malpractice: What You Must Prove
February 6th, 2017
If you believe you were not represented properly by an attorney, a Kansas legal malpractice attorney can help determine if you may have a claim. As you can imagine, pursuing a claim against an attorney can be an uphill battle. Attorneys that may be p… Read More

Read more from our blog

Representative Work

$170,000 Jury Verdict in Negligent Misrepresenation Case
On April 24, 2018, attorney Patrick Hamilton obtained a $170,000 jury verdict in the United States District Court for the District of Kansas in a negligent misrepresentation case. Hamilton Law Firm’s client purchased a house in Kansas City, Missouri. Defendant Kathryn Sylvia was the seller’s real estate agent and an employee of defendant Platinum Realty. The sale was a “cash sale” in which payment was to be wired. The plaintiff received wiring instructions via email from Sylvia’s email account. Plaintiff forwarded the wiring instructions to his bank, which wired his money in accordance with the instructions. In actuality, the wiring instructions were prepared by a criminal hacker which caused plaintiff’s funds to be misdirected to Citi Bank in New York City. When the loss was discovered, plaintiff sued Sylvia and Platinum for negligent misrepresentation. The defendants claimed they did not email the wiring instructions to plaintiff and that plaintiff was comparatively negligent by not reviewing the wiring instructions before sending them to his bank. After a two day jury trial, the jury assigned defendants 85% of the fault and attributed 15% of the fault to plaintiff. Total damages were $196,622.67 with a net recovery to plaintiff of $167,129.27. Bain v. Platinum Realty LLC et al., Case No. 16-CV-02326-JWL. Read More
$280,000 Jury Verdict in Legal Malpractice Case (January 18, 2017)
On January 18, 2017, Hamilton Law Firm LLC obtained a $280,000.00 jury verdict in a legal malpractice lawsuit for Power Control Devices, Inc., an Olathe company specializing in the manufacture of electronic devices. The underlying litigation involved a breach of contract lawsuit against Orchid Engineering, Technologies and Consulting in the Boston, Massachusetts area. After PCD’s case had been pending for almost two years, Orchid filed a motion for summary judgment contending the lawsuit was not filed before the statutes of limitation expired. The United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts agreed, dismissing Power Control’s claims as untimely. Hamilton Law firm sued Power Control’s attorney in the underlying litigation, Michael “Mick” Lerner, for legal malpractice. After a seven day jury trial in Johnson County Kansas District Court, the jury returned a verdict in favor of Power Control. PCD Verdict Form 2617 Read More

Read more about our successes

Contact Us

Google Map of Hamilton Law Firm LLC’s Location
Hamilton Law Firm LLC
8700 Monrovia, Suite 310
Lenexa, KS 66215
913-647-7512

© 2025 Hamilton Law Firm LLC
View Our Disclaimer
Law Firm Website Design by The Modern Firm

Copyright © 2025 Hamilton Law Firm LLC