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.

  • @Maggoty
    link
    05 months ago

    Just one thing. He only technically ended title 42 immigration restrictions. Effectively he continued Trump’s policies with his own, slightly different policy.

    • @disguy_ovahea
      link
      65 months ago

      He repealed the Muslim ban on March 6, 2021. He overturned Title 42 on May 11, 2023. There were no Presidential border restrictions in place until recently. He spent that time pressing Congress to pass immigration reform and they failed. With sanctuary cities over capacity, and no federal funding, he needed to begin to restrict entry again.

      • @Maggoty
        link
        2
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        Oh how I wish you were right.

        13 May 2023, Guardian, “Title 42 migration restrictions have ended, but Biden’s new policy is tougher”

        People who arrive at the border without using a lawful pathway will be presumed ineligible for asylum.

        But Biden is now replacing Title 42 with an arguably tougher, more restrictive policy. His administration on Friday started implementing a rule barring migrants from asylum if they don’t request refugee status in another country before entering the US.

        The upshot is they have to stay in the dangerous country and get approval via an app (that of course has trouble with facial recognition for BIPOC people) and a consulate visit before traveling. This is because if they go to another country for this process the government claims they found a safe country already.

        And sanctuary cities are not “over capacity” nor are they even an official thing. The federal government does not recognize them. It’s a local decision to not cooperate with ICE. The entire idea that the country has a “capacity” is far right bullshit that goes straight back to 1800’s immigrant bashing.

        Edit to add-

        I especially love this bit, where we cap the number of people from infamously failed and violent countries. And require them to have a connect. Is having a president who doesn’t get sued by the ACLU for immigration too much to ask?

        The White House is also allowing up to 30,000 migrants from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela to fly to the US each month, as long as they have American financial supporters.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          3
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          i was also going to point out biden’s 100% tariffs on electric vehicles contradicts climate initiatives; supporting trump’s immigration policies (as you just did); etc. and i want to say it’s nice to hear someone else splash a dose of reality into the conversation.

          • @Maggoty
            link
            25 months ago

            The only way I could get behind his Chinese tariffs is if he unleashed a DARPA moonshot on batteries and open sourced the resulting technology. But no he dived straight for protectionism and letting the traditional companies sell us cars at double the size and triple the price the market should be at.

            • @disguy_ovahea
              link
              -35 months ago

              So you think we should be in full support of trade with China? Even with their ongoing genocide, threats to the Philippines and Thailand, and active surveillance systems in the US?

              • @Maggoty
                link
                35 months ago

                I gave a legal and internationally safe alternative and you went straight to, “full support of China”. Come on dude. At least try and engage in good faith.

                So here’s a couple ideas you might like better, I guess. We tell the CIA we want those specs; or we buy a hundred for a rip and rebuild and open source the results. Give them the Russian tank/plane treatment.

                • @disguy_ovahea
                  link
                  -15 months ago

                  I wrote “full support of trade with China.” People are protesting for divestment from Israel over genocide in tents they bought from China. I’m just saying it’s hypocritical.

                  • @Maggoty
                    link
                    05 months ago

                    A massive investment in DARPA is hypocritical?