Case: Baldwin v. Panetta

1:12-cv-00832 | U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia

Filed Date: May 23, 2012

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

On May 23, 2012, two women officers in the U.S. Army Reserve, sued the Department of Defense and the Army in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. The plaintiffs, represented by private counsel, asked the court for declaratory and injunctive relief, claiming that their Fifth Amendment rights had been violated by the Department of Defense. Specifically, the plaintiffs claimed the policy of excluding women from 'direct combat' operations violated the Administrative Proced…

On May 23, 2012, two women officers in the U.S. Army Reserve, sued the Department of Defense and the Army in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. The plaintiffs, represented by private counsel, asked the court for declaratory and injunctive relief, claiming that their Fifth Amendment rights had been violated by the Department of Defense. Specifically, the plaintiffs claimed the policy of excluding women from 'direct combat' operations violated the Administrative Procedures Act and the plaintiffs' equal protection rights under the Fifth Amendment.

As part of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2011, the Department of Defense (DoD) was required to submit a report reviewing its combat exclusion policies for women. The DoD had, since 1994, a specific policy of excluding women from being part of units, from the battalion-level down, that engaged in direct combat. The Army had a similar policy.

On February 9, 2012, the DoD submitted the report to Congress, detailing how the Secretaries of the Army, Navy, and Air Force would be given the power to place women into 'direct combat' units, and that the results of this practice would inform future policymaking. The plaintiffs claimed that the DoD policy still permits the exclusion of women from any position where 'job related physical requirements would necessarily exclude the vast majority of women Service members.'

Plaintiffs claim that (1) the policy violates their equal protection rights under the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment; (2) that Army officers are already circumventing the DoD policy by 'attaching' women to combat brigades, calling them "Cultural Support Teams."; and (3) that the policy of excluding women is futile. The complaint points out that warfare has become non-linear, and that women who are not given weapons and combat training are ill-suited and endangered when the units to which they are assigned come under attack.

On November 4, 2013, the parties submitted a notice of voluntary dismissal. The next day, the Court approved the notice and the case was dismissed without prejudice.

Summary Authors

Blase Kearney (5/29/2012)

Katherine Reineck (2/7/2016)

People


Judge(s)

Collyer, Rosemary M. (District of Columbia)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Baer, Kindra M. (District of Columbia)

Japha, Maureen M. (District of Columbia)

Keane, Megan M. (District of Columbia)

McKelvie, Roderick R. (Delaware)

Sipes, Christopher N. (District of Columbia)

Judge(s)

Collyer, Rosemary M. (District of Columbia)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Baer, Kindra M. (District of Columbia)

Japha, Maureen M. (District of Columbia)

Keane, Megan M. (District of Columbia)

McKelvie, Roderick R. (Delaware)

Sipes, Christopher N. (District of Columbia)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

Docket [PACER]

Nov. 5, 2013 Docket
1

Complaint

May 23, 2012 Complaint

Docket

Last updated May 12, 2022, 8 p.m.

ECF Number Description Date Link
1

COMPLAINT against THOMAS P. BOSTICK, THOMAS R. LAMONT, JOHN MCHUGH, LEON EDWARD PANETTA ( Filing fee $ 350, receipt number 4616048463) filed by JANE P. BALDWIN, ELLEN L. HARING. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(rdj) (Entered: 05/23/2012)

May 23, 2012

Summons (4) Issued as to THOMAS P. BOSTICK, THOMAS R. LAMONT, JOHN MCHUGH, LEON EDWARD PANETTA. (rdj) (Entered: 05/23/2012)

May 23, 2012

Summons (2) Issued as to U.S. Attorney and U.S. Attorney General (ls, ) (Entered: 05/23/2012)

May 23, 2012
2

RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and Complaint Executed. JOHN M. MCHUGH served on 6/4/2012 (Sipes, Christopher) Modified on 7/24/2012 to correct date of service(rdj). (Entered: 07/23/2012)

July 23, 2012
3

RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and Complaint Executed. LEON EDWARD PANETTA served on 5/24/2012 (Sipes, Christopher) Modified on 7/24/2012 to correct date of service(rdj). (Entered: 07/23/2012)

July 23, 2012
4

RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and Complaint Executed. THOMAS R. LAMONT served on 6/4/2012 (Sipes, Christopher) Modified on 7/24/2012 to correct date of service(rdj). (Entered: 07/23/2012)

July 23, 2012
5

RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and Complaint Executed. THOMAS P. BOSTICK served on 6/5/2012 (Sipes, Christopher) Modified on 7/24/2012 to correct date of service(rdj). (Entered: 07/23/2012)

July 23, 2012
6

RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and Complaint Executed on United States Attorney General. Date of Service Upon United States Attorney General 05/29/2012. (Sipes, Christopher) (Entered: 07/25/2012)

July 25, 2012
7

RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and Complaint Executed as to the United States Attorney. Date of Service Upon United States Attorney on 5/29/2012. Answer due for ALL FEDERAL DEFENDANTS by 7/28/2012. (Sipes, Christopher)

July 25, 2012

MINUTE ORDER granting 8 Motion for Extension of Time to Answer. Defendants shall respond to the Complaint no later than September 13, 2012. Signed by Judge Rosemary M. Collyer on 7/30/2012. (lcrmc2) (Entered: 07/30/2012)

July 30, 2012

Set/Reset Deadlines/Hearings: Answer to complaint due by 9/13/2012. (cdw) (Entered: 07/31/2012)

July 30, 2012
9

MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction , MOTION to Dismiss by THOMAS P. BOSTICK, THOMAS R. LAMONT, JOHN M. MCHUGH, LEON EDWARD PANETTA (Attachments: # 1 Memorandum in Support, # 2 Exhibit, # 3 Text of Proposed Order)(Wolverton, Caroline) (Entered: 09/13/2012)

Sept. 13, 2012
10

NOTICE of Appearance by Kindra M. Baer on behalf of JANE P. BALDWIN, ELLEN L. HARING (Baer, Kindra) (Entered: 09/19/2012)

Sept. 19, 2012
11

NOTICE of Appearance by Megan Keane on behalf of All Plaintiffs (Keane, Megan) (Entered: 09/19/2012)

Sept. 19, 2012
12

Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 9 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction MOTION to Dismiss by JANE P. BALDWIN, ELLEN L. HARING (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Keane, Megan) (Entered: 09/24/2012)

Sept. 24, 2012

MINUTE ORDER granting 12 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply. Plaintiff shall oppose the motion to dismiss by October 31, 2012. Defendants shall reply by November 12, 2012. Signed by Judge Rosemary M. Collyer on 9/24/2012. (lcrmc2) (Entered: 09/24/2012)

Sept. 24, 2012

Set/Reset Deadlines/Hearings: Response to 9 due by 10/31/2012. Reply to 9 due by 11/12/2012. (cdw) (Entered: 09/25/2012)

Sept. 24, 2012
13

Memorandum in opposition to re 9 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction MOTION to Dismiss filed by JANE P. BALDWIN, ELLEN L. HARING. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order Proposed Order, # 2 Declaration Declaration of Megan P. Keane In Support of Plaintiffs' Opposition, # 3 Exhibit Exhibit A to Keane Decl., # 4 Exhibit Exhibit B to Keane Decl., # 5 Exhibit Exhibit C to Keane Decl., # 6 Exhibit Exhibit D to Keane Decl., # 7 Exhibit Exhibit E to Keane Decl., # 8 Exhibit Exhibit F to Keane Decl., # 9 Exhibit Exhibit G to Keane Decl.)(Keane, Megan) (Entered: 10/31/2012)

Oct. 31, 2012
14

Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 9 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction MOTION to Dismiss by THOMAS P. BOSTICK, THOMAS R. LAMONT, JOHN M. MCHUGH, LEON EDWARD PANETTA (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Wolverton, Caroline) (Entered: 11/06/2012)

Nov. 6, 2012

MINUTE ORDER granting 14 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply. By agreement of the parties, defendants shall file their reply brief in support of their motion to dismiss no later than November 20, 2012. Signed by Judge Rosemary M. Collyer on 11/7/2012. (lcrmc2) (Entered: 11/07/2012)

Nov. 7, 2012

Set/Reset Deadlines/Hearings: Reply to 9 due by 11/20/2012. (cdw) (Entered: 11/08/2012)

Nov. 7, 2012
15

REPLY to opposition to motion re 9 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim upon which Relief Can Be Granted filed by THOMAS P. BOSTICK, THOMAS R. LAMONT, JOHN M. MCHUGH, LEON EDWARD PANETTA. (Wolverton, Caroline) (Entered: 11/20/2012)

Nov. 20, 2012
16

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE. No later than February 25, 2013, Plaintiffs shall show cause why this case should not be dismissed as moot. If plaintiffs intend to pursue this case, they shall show cause why the case should not be stayed pending final implementation of the amended Department of Defense policy. Signed by Judge Rosemary M. Collyer on 2/11/2013. (lcrmc2) (Entered: 02/11/2013)

Feb. 11, 2013

Set/Reset Deadlines/Hearings: Response to Show Cause Order due by 2/25/2013. (cdw) (Entered: 02/13/2013)

Feb. 11, 2013
17

Joint MOTION to Stay by JANE P. BALDWIN, ELLEN L. HARING (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Keane, Megan) (Entered: 02/25/2013)

Feb. 25, 2013
18

RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE by JANE P. BALDWIN, ELLEN L. HARING re 16 Order to Show Cause, . (Keane, Megan) (Entered: 02/25/2013)

Feb. 25, 2013

MINUTE ORDER granting as unopposed 17 Motion to Stay and discharging 16 Order to Show Cause. The parties have reported in their Motion to Stay and in the Response to the Order to Show Cause that they jointly request that the case be stayed until June 1, 2013, pending implementation of new regulations on the assignment of women to combat positions and possible filing of a motion to dismiss the case as moot. Accordingly, it is ordered that the case is STAYED until June 1, 2013. On or before that date, either the parties shall file a joint status report OR defendants shall file a motion to dismiss. Signed by Judge Rosemary M. Collyer on 2/25/2013. (lcrmc2) (Entered: 02/25/2013)

Feb. 25, 2013

Case Stayed. (cdw) (Entered: 02/26/2013)

Feb. 25, 2013
19

Joint MOTION to Stay Proceedings by JANE P. BALDWIN, ELLEN L. HARING (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order to Continue the Stay of Proceedings)(Keane, Megan) (Entered: 05/31/2013)

May 31, 2013

MINUTE ORDER granting 19 Joint Motion to Stay. At the joint request of the parties, this case is stayed until August 30, 2013. The parties shall file a joint status report no later than August 30, 2013. Signed by Judge Rosemary M. Collyer on 5/31/2013. (lcrmc2) (Entered: 05/31/2013)

May 31, 2013

Case Stayed. Set/Reset Deadlines/Hearings: Status Report due by 8/30/2013. (cdw) (Entered: 06/01/2013)

May 31, 2013
20

STATUS REPORT Joint submission by JANE P. BALDWIN, ELLEN L. HARING. (Keane, Megan) (Entered: 08/30/2013)

Aug. 30, 2013

MINUTE ORDER. This case remains stayed until October 31, 2013. The parties shall file a joint status report no later than that date. Signed by Judge Rosemary M. Collyer on 9/4/2013. (lcrmc2) (Entered: 09/04/2013)

Sept. 4, 2013

Set/Reset Deadlines/Hearings: Joint Status Report due by 10/31/2013. (cdw) (Entered: 09/04/2013)

Sept. 4, 2013
21

Joint MOTION to Stay Proceedings , Joint MOTION for Extension of Time to File Joint Status Report by JANE P. BALDWIN, ELLEN L. HARING (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Keane, Megan) (Entered: 10/31/2013)

Oct. 31, 2013

MINUTE ORDER granting 21 Joint Motion to Stay Proceedings and for Extension of Time. The case is stayed until 11/7/13, at which time the stay shall be automatically lifted; the parties' joint status report shall be due no later than 11/7/13. Signed by Judge Rosemary M. Collyer on 11/1/2013. (lcrmc1) (Entered: 11/01/2013)

Nov. 1, 2013
22

NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by All Plaintiffs (Keane, Megan) (Entered: 11/04/2013)

Nov. 4, 2013

MINUTE ORDER approving Plaintiffs' 22 Notice of Voluntary Dismissal without prejudice. The case is dismissed and closed. Signed by Judge Rosemary M. Collyer on 11/5/2013. (lcrmc1) (Entered: 11/05/2013)

Nov. 5, 2013

State / Territory: District of Columbia

Case Type(s):

Equal Employment

Key Dates

Filing Date: May 23, 2012

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

Two female Army Reserve officers

Plaintiff Type(s):

Private Plaintiff

Public Interest Lawyer: Unknown

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: No

Class Action Outcome: Not sought

Defendants

Department of Defense (Washington), Federal

Case Details

Causes of Action:

Ex Parte Young (Federal) or Bivens

Constitutional Clause(s):

Equal Protection

Availably Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Complaint (any)

Outcome

Prevailing Party: None Yet / None

Nature of Relief:

None yet

Source of Relief:

None yet

Order Duration: 2012 - None

Issues

General:

Disparate Treatment

Pattern or Practice

Discrimination-area:

Other Conditions of Employment (including assignment, transfer, hours, working conditions, etc)

Pay / Benefits

Promotion

Discrimination-basis:

Sex discrimination

Affected Gender:

Female