Human Rights Alert

PO Box 526, La Verne, CA 91750

Fax: 323.488.9697; Email: jz12345@earthlink.net
Blog: http://human-rights-alert.blogspot.com/
Scribd: http://www.scribd.com/Human_Rights_Alert

11-01-23 Press Release: ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ Litigation – Reply claims Log Cabin
Republicans’ opposition to intervention amounted to “hand-waving arguments”.

In their opposition to the Motion to Intervene, the Log Cabin Republicans failed to do the obvious – produce
the Certificate of the October 2010 Judgment. Of significance also is the lack of opposition to the intervention
by the US Department of Justice, and the ongoing refusal of the US District Court to produce the Certificate.
Los Angeles, January 23 – in his Motion to Intervene, [1] Dr Joseph Zernik of Human Rights Alert (NGO)
challenged the validity of the US District Court’s October 2010 Judgment in Log Cabin Republicans v USA,
pertaining to the US Armed Services policy of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’.
Dr Zernik informed the Court of Appeals that the litigation of Log Cabin Republicans v USA in the US
District Court was conducted in apparent violation of Due Process and First Amendment rights, and should be
deemed invalid:
• No Certification was filed of the October 2010 Judgment; absent such certification, the Judgment should
be deemed null and void.
• The Clerk of the US District Court refuses to produce a copy of the Certificate, in apparent violation of
First Amendment right – to access court records to inspect and to copy.
• The Clerk of the US District Court also refuses to certify the docket of the case.
Even absent the Certificate of the October 2010 Judgment, Dr Zernik provided evidence from the US District
Court’s docket that the litigation in Log Cabin Republicans v USA should be deemed invalid from start to end:
• Two US Judges appeared in the case, both with no Assignment Orders. Absent Assignment Order in
a specific case, a US judge has no authority to adjudicate in the matter.
• In 2004 Judge Schiavelli issued a judgment in the case, in favor of the United States. The judgment
was listed in the docket as “entered”, and was listed in the Judgment Index of the Court.
Consequently, the case was deemed “closed” by court staff.
• The 2004 Judge Schiavelli Judgment was never overturned through an appeal, or any other judicial
proceedings.
• In 2010 Judge Phillips appeared in the case and issued the opposing judgment, in favor of the Log
Cabin Republicans. The 2010 judgment was again listed in the docket as “entered”, but was not
listed in the Judgment Index of the Court.
Attorneys for Log Cabin Republicans filed on January 11, 2011, their opposition to Zernik’s Motion to
Intervene. [2] The succinct opposition states: “Proposed Intervenor Zernik has no known connection to this
case, nor any known interest therein… Neither party has invited the participation of this individual…”
Zernik has now filed his reply to the Log Cabin Republicans opposition. [3] Dr Zernik claimed that the Log
Cabin Republicans opposition lacked in substance and amounted to “hand-waving arguments”:
z Page 2/2 January 23, 2011

• The Log Cabin Republicans’ opposition failed to do the obvious – produce a valid Certificate of the
October 2010 Judgment. It never provided any explanation for the refusal to produce the Certificate,
either.
• The Log Cabin Republicans’ opposition failed to provide any legal basis for the notion that intervention
in the US courts was by party’s invitation only.
• The Log Cabin Republicans’ opposition failed to address Zernik’s claims of interest in the case, and the
interest of any person residing under the 9th Circuit in integrity of litigation in the US District Courts.
In particular, the Log Cabin Republicans may find themselves now inconsistent with their basic position
regarding the underlying ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ policy. Their objection to ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ was
founded on allegations of abuse of the Civil Rights of gays in the Armed Services. The Log Cabin
Republicans’ opposition to the Motion to Intervene never challenged the alleged violations of Due Process
and First Amendment rights that were inherent to the conduct of the litigation in the US District Court itself.
Zernik’s reply also informed the Court of Appeals of the significance of the lack of response on the Motion to
Intervene by others:
• The US Department of Justice, which filed its own appeal in the matter, has not opposed the Motion to
Intervene, inherent to which was a request to dismiss the appeals.
• The US District Court itself continues to refuse to produce a Certificate for the October 2010 Judgment.
The US Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit, issued a January 18, 2011 Order stating:
The pending motions by proposed intervenor Joseph Zernik shall be addressed in a separate order.
________

LINKS:
[1] 11-01-08 Press Release: ‘Don’t Ask Don’t Tell' - Motion to Intervene, Requesting the US Court of Appeals to
Dismiss the Appeals from an Uncertified Judgment, was Posted in the Docket, is Now Pending before the Court-s
http://www.scribd.com/doc/46528428/
[2] 11-01-21 Press Release: Log Cabin Republicans Oppose Challenge to Validity of the Judgment in the ‘Don’t
Ask, Don’t Tell’ Litigation
http://www.scribd.com/doc/47323956/
[3] 11-01-23 Log Cabin Republicans v USA (10-56634, 10-56813) Zernik’s Reply in Support of Motion to Intervene
as filed and served
http://www.scribd.com/doc/47400611/
________
Human Rights Alert is dedicated to discovering, archiving, and disseminating evidence of Human Rights violations by the
justice systems of the State of California and the United States in Los Angeles County, California, and beyond. Human
Rights Alert focuses on the unique role of computerized case management systems in the precipitous deterioration of
the integrity of the justice system in the United States.

http://twitter.com/inproperinla
http://www.scribd.com/Human_Rights_Alert
http://human-rights-alert.blogspot.com/