Joe Biden has moved to correct a “great injustice” by pardoning thousands of US veterans convicted over six decades under a military law that banned gay sex.

The presidential proclamation, which comes during Pride month and an election year, allows LGBTQ+ service members convicted of crimes based solely on their sexual orientation to apply for a certificate of pardon that will help them receive withheld benefits.

It grants clemency to service members convicted under Uniform Code of Military Justice article 125 – which criminalised sodomy, including between consenting adults – between 1951 and 2013, when it was rewritten by Congress.

That includes victims of the 1950s “lavender scare”, a witch-hunt in which many LGBTQ+ people employed by the federal government were viewed as security risks amid fears their sexual orientation made them vulnerable to blackmail. Thousands were investigated and fired or denied employment.

  • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    138
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” was bigoted propaganda branded as a consideration, and the Lavender Scare was horrifically layered oppression. It was basically, “We’ve decided your sexuality is scandalous, forcing you to hide it, which makes you at risk of being blackmailed, so we’re charging you with a crime.” Fucking despicable.

    These pardons are excellent. It’s such a shame thousands of veterans had to live so long with criminal records for who they are, not even what they did.

    • NOT_RICK@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      37
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      We’ve decided your sexuality is scandalous, forcing you to hide it, which makes you at risk of being blackmailed, so we’re charging you with a crime.” Fucking despicable.

      While obviously not near the same level of criminalizing someone for part of their core identity, I’ve felt the same way about the US government’s treatment of pot smokers. Can’t get a security clearance if you’ve smoked pot within the past 7 years because it’s blackmail leverage ignoring the fact that it’s only blackmail material when the government considers it verboten

      • ZapBeebz_@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        10 months ago

        You can 100% get a clearance if you’ve smoked within 7 years of applying for one. Hell, you can get a clearance if you smoked within the last year. You just have to a) disclose the fact, b) be able to show mitigations as to why smoking weed won’t be an issue while you have a clearance, and then c) not do it while you have a clearance. It ends up being not so much about the fact that you smoke weed as it is that you’re not following the law, and that’s the real clearance risk (from their POV). Getting a clearance is really about proving you’re trustworthy to the investigator.

        • Maggoty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          10 months ago

          There are agencies, iirc mostly law enforcement, that consider it a strict bar. It also depends on the level of clearance, and how much they need you. An Army private getting a secret clearance to present weather to the general on the daily isn’t getting nearly as much scrutiny as a nuclear physicist. But nuclear physicists willing to work for the government are a finite resource. It’s all clear as mud and the fear of losing your career over some stupid persecution is real.

      • credo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        10 months ago

        It’s not so much the blackmail with pot, it’s the fact you can’t “follow the rules”. They will give a bye for previous smoking events (before you need the clearance, took a position etc.), it’s smoking with a clearance or NOT telling them that will get you wrapped up.

    • Omega@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      10 months ago

      I thought the concept of don’t ask don’t tell was a way to let gay people serve without getting congress to change the laws. Kind of like federal pot laws. It’s technically illegal, they’re just not supposed to enforce it.

      • Maggoty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        10 months ago

        I can’t speak for Bill Clinton’s thoughts but the military never engaged with it in good faith. They considered any discovery as “telling”. Some service members at the time even described unit members spying on their homes to see who they lived with. Even a letter from an old lover that someone took from your belongings would be considered telling. The function of the policy was that if they could “out” you, they would discharge you with bad papers.

        Under this kind of atmosphere homophobia becomes ten times worse because the possibility of that guy being gay puts your career at risk too, in case you get too close and are swept up with them.