On the other hand, the plaintiff does not challenge the rational basis of Army Regulation 135-178, which mandates a discharge solely on the grounds of homosexuality. As the plaintiff does not dispute the legitimacy of the government’s interest in the regulation, it is up to the court to determine whether the regulation is rationally related to this interest.
AR 135-178 provides general procedural guidance for the separation process, and certain chapters provide more specific procedural guidance. For example, Chapter 12 deals with the abuse of illegal drugs, while Chapter 13 outlines the requirements for an unsatisfactory performance rating. In addition, the regulation provides for JAG assistance in separation actions. The following is a summary of the regulations applicable to Army National Guard and Army Reserve enlisted Soldiers.
While this case involves a discharge for publicly acknowledging sexual orientation, the Ninth Circuit has recognized a distinction between sexual orientation and conduct. The Ninth Circuit’s ruling in the Pruitt case, for example, dealt with the discharge of a plaintiff for public acknowledgment of his sexual orientation. In the case of Pruitt, the Government argued that the right to discharge a servicemember for this conduct is supported by law. In the Pruitt case, the court distinguished the Pruitt case from Bowers, a case in which a servicemember was discharged for publicly acknowledging his sexual orientation.
The disclosure of a client’s information under Army Regulation 135-178 requires written consent from the client. The only exceptions are when the disclosure is made to a physician outside the Armed Forces, or to a qualified person conducting scientific research or financial audits. Additionally, the disclosure of information may be required under a court order.
The Army’s discharge of Cammermeyer was based on his homosexual orientation. The discharge was a violation of his equal protection of laws and his rights to privacy, as protected under the Fifth Amendment. In addition to his sexual orientation, Cammermeyer claims that Army Regulation 135-178 violates his principles of federalism.
Recruiters may be involuntarily removed from SADT if they engage in conduct that violates the UCMJ or involves misconduct. Although this procedure does not involve a hearing, it allows the service to investigate the grounds and present them to the plaintiff in a formal format, with supporting evidence. The plaintiff is then allowed to file a rebuttal within fifteen days.
The responsible member of command must personally deliver a copy of the notification memo, supporting documentation, and the Soldier’s response. The document will be filed in the Soldier’s Local Personnel File. Many of the documents will be duplicates of the originals already filed in the file. If the Soldier is not available to sign the packet, he may request it to be sent through Certified Mail Procedures.
When a person has been accused of sexual misconduct, the law is intended to protect the person who has committed a crime. This is one of the reasons why an organization should take action. It is important to ensure that soldiers respect the rights of other people, including the rights of women.