(Washington) Army Lieutenant Colonel Steve Loomis, who was discharged under 'don't ask, don't tell' in 1997 - just five days before he was to retire - will finally get his day in court.
The U.S. Federal Court of Claims will hear arguments on Sept. 7 in the case on Wednesday.
When Loomis was discharged he lost his Army pension, estimated by the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network at about a million dollars.
Loomis, an engineer war plans officer, was outed in the course of an arson investigation after someone set fire to his off-base home near Fort Hood, Texas.
The investigation into the fire was carried out by civilian fire department officials. A videotape discovered during the course of the investigation was the basis for his discharge.
Loomis' lawsuit alleges the investigation of his home and the seizure of the videotape was a violation of Fourth Amendment rights. The suit also charges the Army violated Loomis' right to a fair and impartial discharge hearing and that his discharge is rendered unconstitutional in light of the Supreme Court's historic decision in Lawrence v. Texas. In Lawrence, the high court found a fundamental right to privacy for lesbian and gay Americans, and struck down state sodomy laws prohibiting consensual, adult relationships.
David Sheldon, a private practice Washington, D.C.-based attorney representing Loomis, and a noted expert on military law, said that "LTC Loomis loss of retirement constitutes a gross miscarriage of justice."
Loomis received a Purple Heart, two Bronze Stars and an Air Medal for his service in Vietnam. He was awarded his fourth Meritorious Service Medal and was recognized for promotion to full Colonel on the evening his home was destroyed by arson.
"What makes the loss of a decorated war veteran like Steve Loomis even more senseless and tragic is the fact that he is but one of many who have lost careers because of 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell,'" said A.J. Rogue, president of American Veterans for Equal Rights, a national LGBT veterans group.
"In turn, our nation is suffering no less of a loss in vital manpower, simply because of sexual orientation. Lieutenant Colonel Loomis' case alone is proof that 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' doesn't work. Our national security is suffering, not to mention the huge amount of money spent on recruiting and retraining individuals lost to the ban."
The Loomis lawsuit is one of three currently pending in federal court.
The U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts recently heard oral arguments in Cook v. Rumsfeld, a constitutional challenge to 'don't ask, don't tell' filed on behalf of twelve former service members by Servicemembers Legal Defense Network. (story)
The Federal District Court for the Central District of California is also expected to rule soon on a motion in a challenge brought by Log Cabin Republicans. (story)
"The military's continued enforcement of what we believe is an unconstitutional law has significant costs for our national interests," said C. Dixon Osburn, executive director of SLDN in a press statement.
"Qualified and talented men and women continue to be turned away from military service, at a time when our nation needs them most, for no reason other than simple discrimination. Our freedom is more secure when our military places qualification above sexual orientation."
Since 1993, more than 10,000 service members have been discharged under 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell,' according to Department of Defense figures. Since September 11, gay discharges have fallen more than 40 percent, continuing an historic trend of fewer discharges during times of conflict.
Back in 1985, I knew two women (Pam and Lori) who were each married and, ultimately divorced their husbands. They moved in together to share expenses and one vindictive husband's accusation was all it took for these women's lives and careers to become a living hell. Lori's husband claimed that the two were having a homosexual affair with each other and, just based on his say-so, their security clearances were yanked and they were placed in casual status.
After many months, Lori's hearing was first. Lori's husband had "proof" of the relationship -- that proof being that Lori came home with sand in her hair and clothing. (Note: we were living in Hawaii at the time...). There was other stupidity involved but, ultimately, Lori was exonerated and returned to full duty with her security clearance intact.
Subsequent to Lori's hearing, Pam's hearing didn't go so well. Although Lori was exonerated, Pam wasn't. It was determined that Pam was having a homosexual relationship with Lori, even though Lori was exonerated of having the homosexual relationship with Pam. Vindictiveness at work again. Once accused, always guilty. With only three weeks left on her enlistment, Pam was given the boot. But, not only was she given the boot, but she was told she'd have to forfeit a portion of her enlistment bonus for not fulfilling the terms of her enlistment contract -- that being to serve a certain amount of time.
Pam had a masters degree in Education. So, not only was her military career destroyed, her civilian career was, too. Pam hired a lawyer and ultimately had the board's findings overturned and the monetary claims the military had against her waived as well, but at considerable cost to herself and not before all the damage had been done.
Everything that Pam was had been destroyed. For a few years her life spiraled downward before an old friend of hers encouraged her to apply for a job at the local school system. Today, Pam teaches physical education to special needs kids, but the part of Pam that was destroyed was never regained.
This sort of bullshit policy has to go. ALL laws and policies and rules and regulations that discriminate, overtly or covertly, against homosexuals have got to go. We are a nation that is trying really hard to cut off our noses in order to spite our faces. Or is it so we don't have to smell the stink of discrimination?
No comments:
Post a Comment