Kentucky guardsman sues over tattoo rules

[alp227]

Source: AP

LOUISVILLE, Ky. (AP) — A Kentucky National Guard soldier with aspirations of joining a U.S. Army special operations unit wants a federal judge to overturn the military's new regulations concerning soldiers with tattoos.

Staff Sgt. Adam C. Thorogood of Nashville, Tennessee, said the tattoos covering his left arm from the elbow to the wrist aren't harmful, but the Army is using the body art against him and stopping him from fulfilling a dream of joining "The Nightstalkers," the 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment at Fort Campbell, Kentucky. Thorogood's attorneys said the new rules are preventing their client from seeking appointment as a warrant officer.

Thorogood, 28, sued Thursday in U.S. District Court in Paducah, Kentucky, seeking to have the new rules declared unconstitutional. He is seeking $100 million in damages.

The regulations went into effect in March cover a variety of appearance-related issues including hair styles, fingernails, glasses and jewelry. The rules ban tattoos below the knee or elbow. Soldiers who already have the ink are grandfathered in. Under the new regulations, any soldier with tattoos is barred from seeking a promotion to warrant officer or commissioning as an officer.

Read more: http://bigstory.ap.org/article/kentucky-guardsman-sues-over-tattoo-rules-0

[TexasProgresive]

1. I kind of remember that when you are in the service

you are to defend the constitution but you are under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Perhaps if this guy had himself inked all over with BDU type camo they'd let it slide.

[Submariner]

2. I recall two tattooed Navy Chiefs promoted to Warrant Officer

who had to have the tattoos surgically removed before they could receive their commissions. It was back in the late 60s. They did it and the removal areas on their arms had that smooth-skin look of a severe burn victim. They essentially mutilated themselves in order to get the promotions.

When they got the tats as young sailors, neither thought they would be elevated above enlisted ranks. The rank and the money were worth it to them.

[Reter]

7. I had a tattoo removed

It's a hell of a lot smoother these days with laser removal. I don't even want to think how it was done in the 60's.

[Submariner]

8. Scalpel removal with skin graft replacement flesh from the upper thigh

which explains the same burn victim skin replacement method.

And in the repertoire of a Sailor, they said it hurt.

[JVS]

3. I think he has a reasonable case.

May said the new regulations violate a constitutional ban on laws that retroactively change the legal consequences or status of actions that were committed before the enactment of the law. The ban also infringes upon Thorogood's free speech rights, May said .

Free speech is a non-issue here. The retroactive change of consequences is important though. The article points out that soldiers with ink are grandfathered in. Their eligibility for advancement should be grandfathered in as well. Otherwise they are suffering punishment for a rule that is being applied retroactively.

[MADem]

9. Well, what's retroactive, really? You sign up to obey the orders of the President of the US, and if

you are enlisted, you sign up to obey the orders of the officers appointed over you. This guy AGREED to that when he put his hand in the air, once to DEP, once to go active, and every time he re-enlisted.

He has no choice but to obey those orders--or leave.

Standards change all the time in the military. In 1983 in the Navy you could wear a big old beard, in 1984 you couldn't--clean shaven became the rule, mustaches only. The word went forth that it was shave it off or get out (the secret chinlessness of many blowhards was revealed to the great hilarity of many...!). In the sixties they didn't do drug testing or PT tests; in the late seventies they fired all that up. Do you think the people who were already in became exempt from those new rules?

No one's kicking him out--he just can't apply for a special job. Why? The standards have changed.

I don't think he'll have any success with his gripe--he's in the military, not working at Fed-Ex. They change regulations routinely in all branches of service, they change uniforms, they change requirements for promotion, they change grooming standards, they change weight standards, they change physical readiness standards.

They've been doing this "change" thing for HUNDREDS of years now. No one's strutting around dressed like George Washington on any Army base these days.

Further, the military is in full-bore drawdown mode and they're just looking for any excuse to show folks the door...the nail that sticks up gets hammered down.

[Xithras]

14. No, he has no case at all.

He's talking about Article I, Section 9 which prohibits Ex Post Facto laws.

The Supreme Court established in Calder v. Bull that prohibitions on Ex Post Facto only apply in criminal cases, and not in civil or regulatory cases. That finding was recently confirmed in Kansas v. Hendricks, which again stated that Ex Post Facto doesn't apply to non-criminal regulations.

I'm a bit surprised that a lawyer took the case.

[earthside]

4. The word is 'responsibility'.

At some point, at some level we all have to accept the consequences of our own personal decisions.

This fellow is expecting the military to change its rules for a personal choice he made for himself -- He doesn't sound responsible enough or serious enough to be a member of "The Nightstalkers."

There is, of course, laser tattoo removal.

[MADem]

10. Yes, and this whole "get rid of the tattoos" thing has been coming down the pike for YEARS now.

As the war wound down, the services began getting more and more picky. I've been hearing a large amount of "noise" about military tattoos for the last five or six years, and I'm outta the loop. I'm sure it's been kicking around even longer than that.

He could go and get them removed, too. It hurts, so I am told, even with the laser.

I doubt he will win his case for the reasons I have outlined elsewhere in this thread. Everything doesn't stop for this guy, and I agree with your assessment that he's probably not "Nightstalker" material.

[EX500rider]

5. I wonder how he figures $100 MILLION in damages?

(I know, it was some lawyers amount no doubt)

[Blue_Tires]

6. Good luck trying to collect that $100 million

If they were religious/cultural tattoos then he might have a chance

[Jesus Malverde]

11. Boo Hoo....nt

[hoosierlib]

12. Good Luck (sarcasm)

Regs are regs...

[Auntie Bush]

13. If he asperations for the future...

Why did he get his arm all decorated in red and blue ink? Shows he doesn't have the smarts to advance further.