Trans military colonel issues defiant message after being booted from post as Donald Trump ban takes effect
Colonel Bree Fram, who came out as transgender in 2016 when the initial ban on trans troops was lifted, was an astronautical engineer in the U.S. Space Force and was the Pentagon 's division chief for requirements integration.
She posted to Instagram on Friday saying 'I have been officially placed on administrative leave, effective tomorrow, pending separation' after the Supreme Court ruled the ban could go ahead.
Fram - whose profile picture on the social media app is an LGBT rainbow version of the Space Force logo - defiantly spoke of sobbing as she pinned medals on three of 'my folks' in her last official act in service.
She wrote: 'The last salute broke my heart in two and the tears flowed freely even as I have so much to be thankful for and so many amazing memories.'
Fram detailed the day she came out in 2016, telling a story of how her colleagues responded to the announcement by shaking her hand and, one by one, saying: 'It's an honor to serve with you.'
She also spoke about a similar experience last week, when she announced at a joint staff meeting that she was leaving and that she no longer met 'the current standard for military excellence and readiness'.
She said: 'A room full of senior leaders, admirals and generals, walked over to me and the scene from 2016 repeated. They offered those same words, now tinged with the sadness of past tense: "It's been an honor to serve with you".'
She added that she walked away with tears in her eyes because Fram felt that it had been her honor all along.
She wrote: 'It has been the honor of a lifetime to serve this nation and defend the freedoms and opportunities we have as Americans. My wildest dreams came true wearing this uniform.'
In the past six months, Fram had been posting photos of her fellow transgender troops on Instagram listing their accomplishment with the tagline: 'Happens to Be Trans.'
Fram told Stars And Stripes that her work recently had been focused on 'defining the future capabilities that we're going to need to win wars far into the future'.
She added that her Instagram post was an attempt to speak on behalf of her fellow transgender soldiers.
She said: 'It is almost a duty and an obligation to speak on their behalf because it is my privilege to do so and to hopefully represent transgender service members well that do not have the privilege that comes along with the rank and the experience that I do.
'If I don't speak for them and they are unable to speak for themselves, who will speak for them?'
In early May, the Supreme Court ruled that President Trump 's ban on troops with gender dysphoria can stand.
The Supreme Court's ruling lifts a lower court's decision to pause Trump's policy, which the administration called 'dramatic and facially unfair '.
The order allows the Department Of Defense to continue removing trans service members from the military and denying enlistment while lawsuits continue in the lower courts..
On January 20, President Trump signed an executive order ordering Pete Hegseth to enact a ban on 'individuals with gender dysphoria' serving in the U.S. military.
District Judge Benjamin Settle in Washington state ruled that the ban violated the Constitution's guarantee of equal protection and barred the government from enforcing Trump's policy.
The Trump administration appealed to the U.S. Court Of Appeals for the 9th Circuit but it was rejected, prompting them to appeal to the Supreme Court.
Trump's lawyers argued that the ruling was 'contrary to military readiness and the Nation's interests'.
The liberal justices - Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson - would have decided against Trump, they indicated in the filing, but the Supreme Court ruling was not signed.
The ruling was an emergency appeal prompting an unusually swift ruling from the Supreme Court justices, although they can rule on the merits of the case at a later date.
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt celebrated the news in a statement.
She wrote: 'Another MASSIVE victory in the Supreme Court! President Trump and Secretary Pete Hegseth are restoring a military that is focused on readiness and lethality - not DEI or woke gender ideology.'
The ban enacted by the Department Of Defense on February 26 detailed that 'the medical, surgical, and mental health constraints on individuals who have a current diagnosis or history of, or exhibit symptoms with, gender dysphoria are incompatible with the high mental and physical standards necessary for military service'.
The level challenge to the order was filed by Commander Emily Shilling, together with six other current transgender service members and one transgender person who wants to join the military.
Schilling appeared at the LGBT Community Center dinner on April 10 to be honored for the legal fight against the president and his administration.
Schilling said: 'I swore an oath to support and defend the constitution. That oath requires obedience to lawful orders. But when an order undermines the very principles I swore to uphold, I have the responsibility to challenge it.'
Shortly after he was inaugurated in 2021, Joe Biden signed an executive order overturning Trump's initial ban on service of transgender individuals in the military. After Trump was inaugurated he ordered the ban to be reinstated.
Trump and Hegseth view the extra care required for transgender service members to be a distraction to military readiness.
In February, Hegseth ordered a pause on gender-transitioning medical procedures for active duty service members.
His memo said: 'Effective immediately, all new accessions for individuals with a history of gender dysphoria are paused, and all unscheduled, scheduled, or planned medical procedures associated with affirming or facilitating a gender transition for Service members are paused.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
20 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Tim Scott smacks down CBS anchor over Trump question
A top Republican in the U.S. Senate stepped up to defend his Christian faith and relationship with President Trump during an interview on CBS Tuesday. Republican South Carolina Senator Tim Scott appeared on 'CBS Mornings Plus' to promote his new book on Christian faith in America. CBS anchor Adriana Diaz bluntly asked Scott about how he reconciles his 'support for President Trump when many people see his actions as lacking Christian values.' Diaz mentioned Trump's hardline immigration policies as well as cuts to foreign aid. Scott, a practicing Christian, fired back: 'Being able to put ourselves back on solid ground is really important.' He then listed off a slew of actions taken under Trump, which he sees as policy wins for all Americans, including Christians, including his big tax bill and lowering inflation. 'When we passed the Trump tax cuts in 2017, we lowered the taxes for a single mother by 70%. If you look at the expansion of the child tax credit, $2,200 today, it was $2,000 when we first passed it, it was only $1,000 before we passed it,' Scott said, harkening back to Trump's first term. On foreign aid, Scott pointed to Trump's action on PEPFAR, the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, which Trump has 'reinforced' to provide 'billions of dollars to Africa for AIDS.' 'I would say, without any question, the most compassionate approach to providing the best future for the American people is by giving them as many of their resources to make their own decisions,' Scott argued. The South Carolina Republican was additionally asked if he agreed with Trump's recent firing of the Commissioner of the Bureau of Statistics (BLS). Although Scott did not give a direct answer on whether or not he believed the former BLS Commissioner had been a 'political hack,' he did share the belief that the agency had been 'mismanaged.' Trump and Scott have had a long history together, as far back as their time as rivals during the 2016 presidential primary election. Scott is the longest-serving African American in U.S. Senate history, and the only one to have served in the House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate. The senator is doing media rounds to promote his new book on Christian faith in America, 'One Nation Always Under God: Profiles in Christian Courage.' In the book, Scott's overall argument is that America has shifted from its Judeo-Christian values. Scott has long been outspoken about his Christian faith. Fox News host Ainsley Earhardt then asked Noce how she knew Scott was 'the one.' 'God shows you the path,' Noce responded. She added that she ignores critics who say they got married because he was a presidential nominee and are 'upset he is a black man.' Tim Scott became a stepfather after marrying Mindy Noce last year. Fox & Friends host Ainsley Earhardt questioned the couple about the criticism they've received - particularly from ABC's The View, who suggested the senator only got engaged to be in the running for vice president. 'They are ridiculous, period. It is not just comments about me, they get paid to tear people down,' Scott replied. He added he 'goes into prayer' when the negativity about their relationship surfaces.
The Guardian
20 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Dolphins quarterback Tua Tagovailoa says sitting on Trump's sports council will be ‘an honor'
Miami Dolphins quarterback Tua Tagovailoa has spoken of his pride at being named to Donald Trump's council on sports, fitness, and nutrition. Tagovailoa joins two other current NFL stars on the council, Nick Bosa and Harrison Butker, who have been backers of Trump's Maga movement. While Tagovailoa has not publicly expressed his support for the president, who once described NFL players who knelt for the national anthem as 'sons of bitches', he said he was happy to align himself with Trump. 'I think it's pretty cool – it's an honor, [to serve on the council]' Tagovailoa said on Wednesday. 'I don't know too much about it, but it's an honor.' Trump has revitalized the council under an executive order that will also being back the presidential fitness test for American children, which was phased out during the Obama administration. Tagovailoa said he did not know why he had been named to the council. When Trump announced the council's members he mispronounced Tagovailoa's name. On Wednesday. the quarterback laughed off the president's error. 'I don't think he's had the worst – I heard a couple worse at Alabama,' said Tagovailoa. 'It is what it is, I don't take that to heart.' Earlier this week, Philadelphia Eagles running back Saquon Barkley said he had declined his invitation to sit on the council. 'A couple months ago, it was brought to my team about the council,' Barkley told reporters after Monday's Eagles practice session. 'So I'm not really too familiar with it. I felt like that I am going to be super busy. Me and my family thought it would probably be of best interest to not accept that. I was definitely a little shocked when my name was mentioned. I'm assuming it's something great, so I appreciate it but was a little shocked when my name was mentioned.' NFL commissioner Roger Goodell will also be a member of the council.
The Independent
21 minutes ago
- The Independent
A far-right ‘1st Amendment' group lost its defamation lawsuit. Now the New York Times is suing them back
The New York Times is firing back against the far-right 'paramilitary group' that accused the paper of defamation, filing a new lawsuit after the organization's $100 million case was thrown out of court. In a complaint that was filed in New York this week, the Times is suing 1st Amendment Praetorian for 'reasonable costs, attorney's fees, and disbursements pursuant to New York Civil Rights Law' while noting that the paper incurred at least $50,000 in legal fees defending against the organization's 'meritless' litigation. It is a lawsuit under anti-SLAPP provisions designed to protect First Amendment rights. 'Judge [Mary Kay] Vyskocil's careful opinion granting our motion to dismiss recognized that the claims against The Times were meritless,' a New York Times spokesperson told The Independent. 'New York's anti-SLAPP law therefore requires that 1st Amendment Praetorian pay the costs of The Times's defense. Fee shifting is an important deterrent to frivolous lawsuits against the press and The Times looks forward to recovering its costs.' The Independent has reached out to the 1st Amendment Praetorian for comment. 1st Amendment Praetorian, otherwise known as 1AP, initially brought its lawsuit against the Times in January 2023 in response to several articles the outlet published about the scrutiny the group had received surrounding the January 6 Capitol attack. These reports were in relation to the House committee that investigated January 6 issuing a subpoena to 1AP and its founder Robert Patrick Lewis in November 2021. 'The subpoena compelled 1AP to produce documents pertaining to the events leading up to and transpiring on that day. The Committee specifically sought documents related to the security that 1AP had provided to allies of President Trump—including Stop the Steal campaign organizer Ali Alexander and Lt. Gen. Michael T. Flynn—as well as various social media posts made by 1AP on or around January 6, among other materials,' the Times noted in its complaint this week. 'The subpoena also compelled Mr. Lewis to appear for a deposition before the Committee.' Following the subpoena of Lewis, the Times published an article in January 2022 that reported on the close ties 1AP had with allies of Donald Trump who were looking to undermine confidence in the results of the 2020 presidential election, which Trump lost to Joe Biden. 'By their own account, members of the 1st Amendment Praetorian helped to funnel data on purported election fraud to lawyers suing to overturn the vote count,' Times reporter Alan Feuer reported in that article. 'They guarded celebrities like Michael T. Flynn, Mr. Trump's former national security adviser, at 'Stop the Steal' rallies, where huge crowds gathered to demand that Mr. Trump remain in office. And they supported an explosive proposal to persuade the president to declare an emergency and seize the country's voting machines in a bid to stay in power.' In subsequent articles by Feuer later that year, it was noted that 1AP had provided security for Flynn amid Trump's efforts to overturn the election results, adding that the group also helped former Trump lawyer Sidney Powell gather open-source intelligence about claims of election fraud. Additionally, citing the House committee's description of the organization, 1AP was described as 'far-right,' 'extremist,' and a 'paramilitary group' similar to the Oath Keepers and Proud Boys. 1AP filed a $100 million lawsuit in January 2023 against the Times and Feuer, alleging that the articles and social media posts sharing the pieces defamed the group by 'stating or implying to their Twitter followers and readers that 1AP 'stormed the Capitol' on January 6, 2021.' The paper would reply in court that none of the social media posts presented in the complaint mentioned 1AP and that the articles in question never stated that the group stormed the Capitol. 1AP would later file an amended complaint that alleged the Times made 24 materially false statements about the group, once again seeking $100 million in compensatory and punitive damages. In March of this year, the court granted the Times' motion to dismiss the complaint with prejudice. In its ruling, the court stated that 1AP not only failed to sufficiently show that the Times published any alleged defamatory statements with actual malice, but also didn't show 'any level of specificity' with its defamation claim. Beyond that, many of the supposed defamatory statements the group highlighted were not 'of or concerning' 1AP, with the group also failing to even show that many of the statements were false. Meanwhile, at the time of its lawsuit, Rolling Stone suggested that 1AP was taking on a highly litigious stance in an effort to distance itself from other right-wing organizations and figures associated with the Capitol attack. Instead, the organization was attempting to rebrand itself as a 'civil liberties group' and 'non-partisan.' 'The litigation is part of a pattern of high-dollar defamation suits brought by 1AP that are ostensibly attempting to clear its reputation,' the magazine reported in February 2023. 'Seen in another light, the lawsuits present a vivid irony: They are filed by an organization that presents itself as a protector of first amendment rights, against parties who've leveraged their own freedom of the press to raise concerns about 1st Amendment Praetorian.' Rolling Stone added: 'The court blitz complicates efforts to scrutinize 1AP, which the Jan. 6 Committee's final report describes as a 'paramilitary group,' and whose founder Lewis has touted the need for a 'second American revolution.'' Citing New York's anti-SLAPP law, which gives publishers increased protections against frivolous lawsuits and allows them to recover damages incurred in defending against those complaints, the Times is now demanding that 1AP pay its attorneys' fees in the dismissed case. ' The Times incurred more than $50,000 in legal fees and costs to defend against 1AP's lawsuit that had no basis in law or fact,' this week's complaint alleges, adding: 'The District Court's opinion makes clear that 1AP both commenced and continued its Action without a substantial basis in fact and law.' The New York Times pushing back against a Trump-adjacent organization over what was ultimately deemed a frivolous and baseless complaint comes at a time when the current president has used the courts to bully media companies with his own 'meritless' lawsuits. Trump, who is currently suing the Wall Street Journal and its owner Rupert Murdoch for $10 billion over a Jeffrey Epstein article, recently obtained a $16 million settlement from Paramount in his lawsuit over a CBS News interview with Kamala Harris. That settlement – which was similar in the amount Disney paid Trump to settle his ABC News lawsuit – came shortly before his administration approved Paramount's $8 billion merger with Skydance Media, which also came just days after CBS announced it was cancelling the late-night show of outspoken Trump critic Stephen Colbert.
