A (SOUNDS LIKE "SEAMAN") IN EVERY PORT

WASHINGTON - The Bush administration last year quietly rewrote the rules for allowing gays and lesbians to receive national-security clearances, drawing complaints from civil rights activists.

The Bush administration said security clearances cannot be denied "solely on the basis of the sexual orientation of the individual." But it removed language saying sexual orientation "may not be used as a basis for or a disqualifying factor in determining a person's eligibility for a security clearance."

Why will these complaints be pointless?

See 1) Department of Navy v. Egan, 484 U.S. 518 (1988) ( holding that Merit Systems Protection Board did not have authority to review substance of underlying decision to deny or revoke a security clearance; this case is still good law, and the Board lacks this authority even if the decision to revoke the clearance was made for discriminatory reasons)

See 2) Webster v. Doe, 486 U.S. 592 (1988) (holding that CIA Director's decision to discharge employee because of employee's homosexuality was not subject to judicial review under Administrative Procedure Act). This case, too, is still good law.

The "unitary executive" is extending its tentacles to punish "goo-nitary" executive officers, so to speak, not for any legitimate reason, but simply because it can.

Remember the scene in L.A. Confidential near the end of the film, when a few of the cops (who were not involved in the heroin conspiracy) were talking about how long it would take the LAPD's "reputation" to be restored? One of the cops grimly says, "Years. It will take years." Another looks at him and says, "Years? Decades."

Decades.