Court Opinion

ID: 9483693
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 09:29:17.629605+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:49:47.551304
License: Public Domain

HARRY T. EDWARDS, Circuit Judge,
concurring in part and concurring in the judgment.
I concur in the opinion insofar as it disposes of Doe’s due process claim. As to Doe’s equal protection claim, I concur only in the judgment. I write separately to *1325make clear my view that there is no evidence in the record that reasonably supports a claim that the Central Intelligence Agency (“CIA”) has a blanket policy against homosexuals. Doe’s equal protection claim should be dismissed on that ground alone. The CIA unequivocally has asserted that it has no such blanket policy, and Government counsel repeated this assertion during oral argument before this court. There is absolutely nothing in the record that plausibly suggests otherwise.
Doe points to no evidence that contradicts the Government’s position that the CIA discharged him after an individualized assessment of the circumstances of his case, rather than pursuant to a blanket ban. The record plainly does not support a contention that Doe was dismissed because of the mere fact of his homosexuality. Furthermore, Doe has pointed to nothing in the record that might reasonably be viewed to suggest that he suffered disparate treatment in his disciplinary assessment by virtue of his homosexuality. In short, Doe has asserted nothing that might prompt consideration of an equal protection claim.