Female military members sue to serve in combat
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) - Four female service members filed a lawsuit Tuesday challenging the Pentagon's ban on women serving in combat, hoping the move will add pressure to drop the policy just as officials are gauging the effect that lifting the prohibition will have on morale.
The lawsuit, filed in federal court in San Francisco, is the second one this year over the 1994 rule that bars women from being assigned to ground combat units, which are smaller and considered more dangerous since they are often in battle for longer periods.
The legal effort comes less than a year after the ban on gays serving openly was lifted and as officials are surveying Marines about whether women would be a distraction in ground combat units.
"I'm trying to get rid of the ban with a sharp poke," said U.S. Army Staff Sgt. Jennifer Hunt, who was among the plaintiffs in the latest lawsuit and was injured in 2007 when her Humvee ran over an improvised explosive device in Iraq.
Hunt and the other three women said the policy unfairly blocks them from promotions and other advancements open to men in combat. Three of the women are in the reserves. A fourth, Marine Corp Lt. Colleen Farrell, leaves active duty this week.
Women comprise 14 percent of the 1.4 million active military personnel. The lawsuit alleges that women are barred from 238,000 positions across the Armed Forces.
At a Washington, D.C., news conference, Pentagon press secretary George Little said the Defense Department was making strides in allowing more women to experience combat. He said Defense Secretary Leon Panetta has opened about 14,500 combat positions to women.
"And he has directed the services to explore the possibility of opening additional roles for women in the military," Little said. "His record is very strong on this issue."
American Civil Liberties Union Ariela Migdal, who represents the four women, said Panetta's actions weren't enough. She called for an end to the combat ban. "These tweaks and minor changes on the margins do a disservice to all the women who serve," she said.
"It falls short," she said. "It is not enough."
Marine Corps Capt. Zoe Bedell said she left active duty, in large part, because of the combat exclusion policy. Bedell said she was frustrated that her advancement in the Marines was blocked by her inability to serve directly in combat units.
"The military is the last place where you are allowed to be discriminated against because of you gender," she said.
Bedell said the blurred front lines of modern warfare, with suicide bombs and sniper attacks, have put more and more women in combat situations.
More than 144 female troops have been killed and more than 860 have been wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan since the wars began, according to Pentagon statistics. Roughly 20,000 of the 205,000 service members currently serving in Afghanistan are women.
Military leaders say they want to make sure lifting gender-based barriers would not disrupt the cohesion of the smaller combat ground units and military operations.
The Marine Corps' top leader, Gen. James Amos, ordered a survey of 53,000 troops to get their views, including whether they believe women in those units would distract male Marines from doing their jobs. The results have not been released yet.
The lawsuit alleges the ban violates constitutional female service members' equal rights. "As a direct result of this policy," the lawsuit states, "women - as a class and solely because of their gender - are barred from entire career fields.
The lawsuit also alleges that women are already serving unofficially in combat units.
Air National Guard Major Mary Jennings Hegar sustained shrapnel wounds in 2009 when she exchanged fire on the ground in Afghanistan after her Medevac helicopter was shot down. Both she and Hunt received Purple Heart medals for their injuries.
The lawsuit was assigned to U.S. District Judge Edward Chen, an appointee of President Barack Obama.
The lawsuit, filed in federal court in San Francisco, is the second one this year over the 1994 rule that bars women from being assigned to ground combat units, which are smaller and considered more dangerous since they are often in battle for longer periods.
The legal effort comes less than a year after the ban on gays serving openly was lifted and as officials are surveying Marines about whether women would be a distraction in ground combat units.
"I'm trying to get rid of the ban with a sharp poke," said U.S. Army Staff Sgt. Jennifer Hunt, who was among the plaintiffs in the latest lawsuit and was injured in 2007 when her Humvee ran over an improvised explosive device in Iraq.
Hunt and the other three women said the policy unfairly blocks them from promotions and other advancements open to men in combat. Three of the women are in the reserves. A fourth, Marine Corp Lt. Colleen Farrell, leaves active duty this week.
Women comprise 14 percent of the 1.4 million active military personnel. The lawsuit alleges that women are barred from 238,000 positions across the Armed Forces.
At a Washington, D.C., news conference, Pentagon press secretary George Little said the Defense Department was making strides in allowing more women to experience combat. He said Defense Secretary Leon Panetta has opened about 14,500 combat positions to women.
"And he has directed the services to explore the possibility of opening additional roles for women in the military," Little said. "His record is very strong on this issue."
American Civil Liberties Union Ariela Migdal, who represents the four women, said Panetta's actions weren't enough. She called for an end to the combat ban. "These tweaks and minor changes on the margins do a disservice to all the women who serve," she said.
"It falls short," she said. "It is not enough."
Marine Corps Capt. Zoe Bedell said she left active duty, in large part, because of the combat exclusion policy. Bedell said she was frustrated that her advancement in the Marines was blocked by her inability to serve directly in combat units.
"The military is the last place where you are allowed to be discriminated against because of you gender," she said.
Bedell said the blurred front lines of modern warfare, with suicide bombs and sniper attacks, have put more and more women in combat situations.
More than 144 female troops have been killed and more than 860 have been wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan since the wars began, according to Pentagon statistics. Roughly 20,000 of the 205,000 service members currently serving in Afghanistan are women.
Military leaders say they want to make sure lifting gender-based barriers would not disrupt the cohesion of the smaller combat ground units and military operations.
The Marine Corps' top leader, Gen. James Amos, ordered a survey of 53,000 troops to get their views, including whether they believe women in those units would distract male Marines from doing their jobs. The results have not been released yet.
The lawsuit alleges the ban violates constitutional female service members' equal rights. "As a direct result of this policy," the lawsuit states, "women - as a class and solely because of their gender - are barred from entire career fields.
The lawsuit also alleges that women are already serving unofficially in combat units.
Air National Guard Major Mary Jennings Hegar sustained shrapnel wounds in 2009 when she exchanged fire on the ground in Afghanistan after her Medevac helicopter was shot down. Both she and Hunt received Purple Heart medals for their injuries.
The lawsuit was assigned to U.S. District Judge Edward Chen, an appointee of President Barack Obama.
Sure thing, as long as they meet all the same physical requirements as men do. And I mean ALL. No separate standards for women. No separate uniform regulations, either - they wear the same haircut.I have a friend who's a Navy medic at camp Pendleton, working with the Marines. He's huge, bulked himself up for the job. Figures he's got to be able to carry a wounded combat marine with full ruck if necessary. There isn't a woman alive who can measure up to his physical strength. There's a lot more to combat than just trigger pulling. It's brutally hard physically demanding, dirty dangerous work. If someone can't carry their share of the load, I don't care how they're plumbed, they have no business being there, endangering other troops.
They will get what they want. But the real question is will the American public be prepared to see their wives, daughters, grand daughters, their mothers bodies mutilated and drug through the streets of some backwater foreign country? Will the American public be prepared to see their flag draped coffins arrive at Andrews AFB?
the really really few, the proud, the good looking woman of the marines......
Women in the Israeli Defense Forces are ordered by their goverment to serve and they are place in combat roles (3%) see Wiki. they have no issues about it why should we?
@needlefrau all of our troops need to be armed going into a combat zone. Sex is not an issue. Eaven this old sloth can carry a a full auto 5.56, or 7.62 with multiple clips. M4 at a minimum. Truck dives should carry a 1911 on their hip over there.
I served during the first Persian Gulf war, but did not see combat. Â One woman who did was still enraged years later that women could go into combat zones, but not armed. Â She said they even had a name for them..."targets."
I personally don't understand why anyone - regardless of gender - would WANT to go into combat. That being said, I have read that in the ancient Celtic armies, the women would fight right alongside the men. In some ways, it really doesn't matter if woman are "allowed" in combat. As the article points out, if you send them to a "hot" zone, they may end up in combat regardless.
 @theprodigal If you choose the military as your career, if you want to serve 20+ years, virtually the only way 95% of officers can advance to field grade commissions is to hold a command in a line combat unit.  Otherwise, the door is closed and you will be forced out.
I hope they are successful. Many militaries of the world allow women combatants if they choose to do so.
Unlike Don't Ask, Don't Tell, the combat exclusion policy is not an act of Congress. As such, no act of Congress is needed to repeal it. I'm no military lawyer, but if Truman could desegregate the military with an executive order, it seems Obama could do the same here.
Â
If the Republicans wanted to make up some lost ground with women, they might ease up on Susan Rice and start asking the president why he doesn't end the exclusion policy.
 @Max Quinn Why would they want to ease of on a lady who lied to the public for 6 weeks to protect her bosses re-election bid?
Â
Why does the left not have any moral backbone if they person with no morals is on their side?
Â
At least the republicans shame their own into stepping down when caught with their pants down or their tongue wagging spitting out lies.
 @FreedomRocks Sorry, I pulled a KHEB and brought Benghazi into this.
Â
Though, you must be high if you could seriously write and post that third sentence. Ever hear of Scooter Libby? Larry Craig? Heck, Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld? Condoleeza Rice? Richard Nixon? Rudy Guliani? David Vitter? Newt Gingrich?
I'm sorry. It's an upper body strength issue. The grunts have to hump 120# packs on a forced march. At that age I could do it for a few miles, now it is no way in heII.
Â
Woman solders are smart and capable, and I highly respect them. Israel has found female troops to be Very vicious in combat. That is one reason they don't deploy them much. It's also a small country and mechanized support works when they do use them.
Â
The Marines, and Army have found it very useful to have women squads to go out into the Muslim areas and talk to the women in those communities. 100% for that, but they are not packing a heavy load and mech is nearby.
Â
Â
Â
Â
@WebFootSTi see Isreal's terms for women in the military (http://www.katu.com/news/national/Female-military-members-sue-to-serve-in-combat-181032721.html
Because they filed a lawsut with the hate group ACLU. Â They should be kick out of the military.
I'd be willing to serve under Colleen Farrell.
 @JTesla The plaintiff is hot!!!!!!!
Why not!
They will get what they want. I saw the Starship Troopers movie and there are women in combat...against giant bugs.
Yes. 100% yes. If someone wishes to fight for our country, why would we stop them??Â
Â
Look at Israel. Some of their most deadly soldiers, are women. Look it up: just google it.Â
Â
Are all women cut out for service? No, just like not all men are cut out for service.Â
Â
But if they are capable, physically and mentally, why stop them from defending our country??Â