Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Thorne v. US Dept of Defense, 4th Cir. (1998)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    12 views2 pages
    Tracy Thorne, a lieutenant in the U.S. Navy, appealed a district court decision upholding his involuntary discharge from the Navy due to his acknowledged homosexuality. The 4th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's ruling based on its prior decision in Thomasson v. Perry, which found that the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy and its implementing regulations regarding homosexuality in the military are constitutional. The court denied Thorne's motion for oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1998-04-09 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 97-1121

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Tracy Thorne, a lieutenant in the U.S. Navy, appealed a district court decision upholding his involuntary discharge from the Navy due to his acknowledged homosexuality. The 4th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's ruling based on its prior decision in Thomasson v. Perry, which found that the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy and its implementing regulations regarding homosexuality in the military are constitutional. The court denied Thorne's motion for oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    12 views2 pages

    Thorne v. US Dept of Defense, 4th Cir. (1998)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Tracy Thorne, a lieutenant in the U.S. Navy, appealed a district court decision upholding his involuntary discharge from the Navy due to his acknowledged homosexuality. The 4th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's ruling based on its prior decision in Thomasson v. Perry, which found that the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy and its implementing regulations regarding homosexuality in the military are constitutional. The court denied Thorne's motion for oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 97-1121

    TRACY THORNE,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE; WILLIAM
    J. PERRY, Secretary of Defense; UNITED STATES
    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY; JOHN H. DALTON,
    Secretary of the Navy,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria.
    T. S. Ellis, III, District
    Judge. (CA-95-369)
    Submitted:

    March 31, 1998

    Decided:

    April 9, 1998

    Before MURNAGHAN and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior


    Circuit Judge.
    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Tracy Thorne, Appellant Pro Se. Edward Roy Hawkens, UNITED STATES
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Appellees.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Lieutenant Tracy Thorne appeals an order of the district court
    upholding his involuntary discharge from the United States Navy on
    account of his acknowledged homosexuality. 916 F. Supp. 1358 (E.D.
    Va. 1996). He contends that the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" plan, see
    10 U.S.C. 654 (1994), and implementing regulations, under which
    he was discharged are unconstitutional.

    We have held to the con-

    trary. See Thomasson v. Perry, 80 F.3d 915 (4th Cir.) (en banc),
    cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 65 U.S.L.W. 3305, 65 U.S.L.W. 3309
    (U.S. Oct. 21, 1996) (No. 96-1). We have considered and rejected
    Thorne's remaining claims on appeal. The judgment of the district
    court is therefore affirmed.

    We deny Thorne's motion for oral

    argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately


    presented in the materials before the court and argument would not
    aid the decisional process.

    AFFIRMED

    You might also like