Ladas wrote:
I didn't say it was unconstitutional to set up a new court, I said it wasn't needed in my opinion, and your argument only reinforces my opinion its a bad idea, and none of the reasons you have stated as to why you think its a good idea appeal to my sense of appropriateness.
Fair enough. However, you did question its Constitutionality. I realize you didn't come right out anc call it explicitly unConstitutional
Quote:
Quote:
Courts have no buisness ruling on the necessity of laws, only their Constitutionality.
I agree. And the ruling from the judge appears to be directly addressing the Constitutionality of the separate law for the military (based upon a exception peculiar to that institution, according to the military).
You just have a different opinion on the comment.
I don't see where you get that from the ruling. The judge is not ruling on the law at all. She is ruling on the Presidential policy of DADT on how it will be enforced.
The ban on gays still exists; the policy about how that law was to be enforced is what she ruled against.