Log Cabin Republicans v. United States
658 F.3d 1162
9th Cir.2011Background
- Don't Ask, Don't Tell (10 U.S.C. § 654(b)) barred service for homosexual conduct/claims; Log Cabin sues challenging §654 and implementing regs as facially unconstitutional under due process, equal protection, and First Amendment; district court held §654 unconstitutional on due process and First Amendment grounds after bench trial; Repeal Act of 2010 repealed §654 effective Sept. 20, 2011; on appeal the case is moot due to repeal; Supreme Court precedents govern mootness and vacatur; district court judgments and findings vacated on remand for dismissal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mootness after repeal of §654 | Log Cabin seeks declaratory relief; repeal moots controversy | No live controversy post-repeal; mootness bars merits | Case moot; vacatur with remand to dismiss |
| Whether declaratory relief survives mootness exceptions | Declaratory relief remains live under exceptions | No applicable mootness exception for declaratory relief | No live issue; declaratory relief not maintainable |
| Appropriate remedy on mootness | District court judgment should stand | Judgment should be vacated due to mootness | Vacatur and remand for dismissal under Munsingwear |
Key Cases Cited
- Hall v. Beals, 396 U.S. 45 (1969) (mootness analysis on repeal/removal of challenged language)
- Burke v. Barnes, 479 U.S. 365 (1987) (live controversy requirement; mootness doctrine)
- United States v. Munsingwear, 340 U.S. 36 (1950) (vacatur when case becomes moot on appeal)
- Helliker v. Chem. Producers & Distribs. Ass'n, 463 F.3d 871 (9th Cir. 2006) (repeal or amendment can moot ongoing litigation; rare reenactment cases)
- Qwest Corp. v. City of Surprise, 434 F.3d 1176 (9th Cir. 2006) (case moot where statute amended to remove challenged part)
- Martinez v. Wilson, 32 F.3d 1415 (9th Cir. 1994) (mootness when statute amended to eliminate factors)
- City of Mesquite v. Aladdin's Castle, Inc., 455 U.S. 283 (1982) (voluntary cessation vs. repeal; reenactment risk)
- Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003) (limited substantive due process; not a general right to homosexual conduct in military)
- Glucksberg v. Washington, 521 U.S. 702 (1997) (established method for substantive due process: careful description and deep roots)
- Collins v. City of Harker Heights, 503 U.S. 115 (1992) (framework for determining fundamental rights in due process)
- Holmes v. California Army National Guard, 124 F.3d 1126 (9th Cir. 1997) (First Amendment challenge to 654(b)(2) upheld)
- Phillips v. Perry, 106 F.3d 1420 (9th Cir. 1997) (reiteration that military discharge decisions have longstanding constitutional support)