In its filing -- in which DOJ lawyers say that Phillips's order is "at odds with basic principles of judicial restraint" -- they make the following request:
We respectfully request that the Court enter an administrative stay by today October 20, 2010, pending this Court’s resolution of the government’s motion for a stay pending appeal, which would maintain the status quo that prevailed before the district court’s decision while the Court considers the government’s stay motion.The request likely will be heard by the "motions panel" for October, which is Judges O'Scannlain, Trott, and W. Fletcher.
The government attorneys go on to argue that Log Cabin Republicans does not have standing to maintain the case, a point that was argued by the government unsuccessfully at trial.
DOJ then argues, "The government has also shown a likelihood of success in its argument that the district court erred in ruling § 654 [the DADT law] unconstitutional on its face."
Finally, DOJ argues that the remedy -- the worldwide injunction against all enforcement of DADT -- is improper because no class had been certified in the case. In other words, because this was not a class-action lawsuit, representing all those impacted by the alleged wrong, an all-encompassing injunction like that ordered by Phillips is improper.
Please read the file
DOJ DADT Stay Request
No comments:
Post a Comment