Latest news with #MilitaryBan
Yahoo
07-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
US supreme court allows Trump trans military ban to take effect
The Trump administration can begin to enforce a ban on transgender troops serving in the military while a challenge to the policy plays out in the courts, the supreme court ruled on Tuesday, a significant decision that could lead to the discharge of thousands of military members. The court's order was unsigned and gave no explanation for its reasoning, which is typical of decisions the justices reach on an emergency basis. The court's three liberal members – Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson – all noted their dissent from the decision. Lambda Legal and the Human Rights Campaign Foundation, which represented challengers in the case, called the decision 'a devastating blow to transgender servicemembers'. 'By allowing this discriminatory ban to take effect while our challenge continues, the Court has temporarily sanctioned a policy that has nothing to do with military readiness and everything to do with prejudice,' the groups said in a statement. 'Transgender individuals meet the same standards and demonstrate the same values as all who serve. We remain steadfast in our belief that this ban violates constitutional guarantees of equal protection and will ultimately be struck down.' Immediately after coming into office, Donald Trump rescinded an executive order from the Biden administration that allowed transgender people to serve openly in the military. On 27 January, the president issued a second executive order that said transgender people could not serve in the military. 'It is the policy of the United States Government to establish high standards for troop readiness, lethality, cohesion, honesty, humility, uniformity, and integrity,' the order said. 'This policy is inconsistent with the medical, surgical, and mental health constraints on individuals with gender dysphoria. This policy is also inconsistent with shifting pronoun usage or use of pronouns that inaccurately reflect an individual's sex.' The defense department began implementing the ban at the end of February. A defense department estimate from earlier this year said there were 4,240 people in the military with a diagnosis of gender dysphoria – roughly 0.2 % of the 2 million people currently serving. Seven transgender servicemembers and one transgender person who would like to join the military challenged the ban. Lawyers for the lead platiniff, navy pilot Emily Shilling, said the military had spent $20m on her training, according to SCOTUSBlog. Several lower courts had halted the ban. The case before the supreme court involved a ruling from US district court judge Benjamin Settle, who blocked the ban in March. 'The government's arguments are not persuasive, and it is not an especially close question on this record,' Settle, an appointee of George W Bush, wrote at the time. 'The government's unrelenting reliance on deference to military judgment is unjustified in the absence of any evidence supporting 'the military's' new judgment reflected in the Military Ban.' Another judge, Ana Reyes, of the US district court in Washington DC, also blocked the ban, saying it was 'soaked with animus and dripping with pretext'. The Trump administration asked the supreme court to intervene last month. 'The district court issued a universal injunction usurping the Executive Branch's authority to determine who may serve in the Nation's armed forces,' John Sauer, the US solicitor general, wrote in a brief to the court. Trump's ban is broader than a similar policy enacted during his first term. The previous policy allowed those who had come out before the ban to continue to serve in the military. The more recent policy affects nearly all active serving transgender members. Pausing the order, Shilling's lawyers said, would 'upend the status quo by allowing the government to immediately begin discharging thousands of transgender servicemembers … thereby ending distinguished careers and gouging holes in military units'. A majority of Americans support allowing transgender people to serve in the military, according to a February Gallup poll. However, there is a sharp partisan split. While 84% of Democrats favor such a policy, only 23% of Republicans do.
The Guardian
24-04-2025
- Politics
- The Guardian
Trump administration asks supreme court to reinstate ban on trans troops
The Trump administration has asked the US supreme court to reinstate its ban on transgender troops serving in the armed forces after several judges issued separate rulings against it. In the latest example of the White House appealing over federal judges' heads to the court's nine justices, the solicitor general, John Sauer, tabled a 39-page brief asking them to stay an injunction issued last month by a district court in Tacoma, Washington, which upheld an earlier ruling preventing the policy being implemented. The attempted exclusion of transgender people from the military stemmed from an executive order issue by Donald Trump, which asserted that the sexual identity of such troops harmed military readiness and 'conflicts with a soldier's commitment to an honorable, truthful, and disciplined lifestyle, even in one's personal life'. The order added: 'A man's assertion that he is a woman, and his requirement that others honor this falsehood, is not consistent with the humility and selflessness required of a service member.' In a ruling in March, Judge Benjamin Settle adjudicated in favor of several transgender service personnel who argued that the policy was discriminatory and insulting and that they would suffer damage and harm to their reputation by being discharged. 'The government's arguments are not persuasive, and it is not an especially close question on this record,' wrote Settle, a former captain in the US army judge advocate general corps and an appointee of George W Bush. 'The government's unrelenting reliance on deference to military judgment is unjustified in the absence of any evidence supporting 'the military's' new judgment reflected in the Military Ban.' His ruling followed an earlier negative ruling from a Washington DC district court judge, Ana Reyes, which had issued a temporary injunction against the ban after saying it was 'soaked in animus'. 'Its language is unabashedly demeaning, its policy stigmatizes transgender persons as inherently unfit, and its conclusions bear no relation to fact,' Reyes wrote. 'Indeed, the cruel irony is that thousands of transgender service members have sacrificed – some risking their lives – to ensure for others the very equal protection rights the military nan seeks to deny them.' In a more limited ruling in March, a judge in New Jersey stopped the air force from discharging two transgender service members, who argued that they would suffer career and reputational damage that could not be financially compensated for. The claims of reputation damage are addressed by Sauer in his brief. 'Any argument that the 2025 policy will cause respondents reputational harm is unfounded given that any discharge under the policy will be honourable except where the service member's record warrants a lower characterisation,' he writes. 'In any event, any harm to the respondents is substantially outweighed by the harm to the government and to the public from forcing the military to maintain a policy the Department [of defense] has deemed inconsistent with 'the best interests of the military services'' and with 'the interests of national security'.' The policy imposed by the defense secretary, Pete Hesgeth, in February allowed no exceptions to the ban. Trump's order is much more all-encompassing than a similar policy he announced during his first presidency, which prohibited transgender people from enlisting and allowed those already serving to continue in a manner consistent with their gender identities and to continue receiving transition-related medical treatment as long as they had come out before the ban. The current policy, by contrast, prevents all transgender people from enlisting and requires the military to identify all service members 'with a current diagnosis or history of, or exhibit symptoms consistent with, gender dysphoria', according to a Pentagon memo filed in the suit adjudicated by Reyes. Trump's initial ban was confirmed by the supreme court but scrapped by Joe Biden after he took office in 2021. Transgender troops were permitted to serve according to a Pentagon policy effected during Barack Obama's presidency in 2016.
Fox News
10-04-2025
- Politics
- Fox News
Hegseth quips '99.9%' of DEI initiatives are gone from the military under Trump's watch
Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth quipped that the Trump administration has wiped out "99.9%" of diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives (DEI) from the military during a Cabinet meeting on Thursday. President Donald Trump questioned Hegseth about whether the military had eradicated 100% of DEI efforts under his leadership, as Cabinet members shared updates on their own agencies' attempts to purge such policies. "99.9, sir – I'm going to get that last point," Hegseth said. The Trump administration has unveiled multiple initiatives to curb DEI initiatives within the military, including signing an executive order in January barring transgender people from enlisting and serving openly in the military. However, two federal judges issued nationwide injunctions in March blocking the Trump administration from enforcing the ban while the lawsuit is pending. In a judgment rendered on March 19, U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes of Washington, D.C., said the Trump administration's order was "soaked in animus," and discriminated based on a person's transgender status. "Indeed, the cruel irony is that thousands of transgender servicemembers have sacrificed – some risking their lives – to ensure for others the very equal protection rights the Military Ban seeks to deny them," Reyes wrote in the decision. Trump signed another executive order in January banning DEI content in K–12 schools that receive federal funds. While military service academies were originally exempt since they are not classified as K–12 institutions, the Pentagon issued instructions to the Naval Academy to remove DEI-related books from its library in March. Included in the list of nearly 400 books purged are "How to be Anti-Racist" and "Stamped From the Beginning: The Definitive History of Racist Ideas in America" by Ibram X. Kendi, as well as "Our Time is Now: Power, Purpose, and the Fight for a Fair America," by former Georgia Rep. Stacey Abrams. Kendi is the founding director emeritus of the Boston University Center for Antiracist Research. He rose to national prominence following the 2020 death of George Floyd at the hands of Minneapolis police. Hegseth has made clear that the Pentagon will not tolerate any DEI initiatives under his watch. "The President's guidance (lawful orders) is clear: No more DEI at @DeptofDefense," Hegseth said in a post on X, formerly Twitter, in January. "The Pentagon will comply, immediately. No exceptions, name-changes, or delays."
Yahoo
28-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Another judge blocks the Pentagon from implementing Trump's transgender military ban
A federal judge in Washington state has blocked the Trump administration's ban on transgender military service, issuing a nationwide preliminary injunction just one day before the Pentagon was set to begin discharging transgender service members. Keep up with the latest in + news and politics. U.S. District Judge Benjamin H. Settle of the Western District of Washington ruled Thursday that the Trump administration's January executive order banning transgender people from serving openly in the armed forces is likely unconstitutional. "To be clear: the government's implementation of the Military Ban and the Hegseth Policy, and any other attempt to identify and separate transgender service members for being transgender, is preliminarily enjoined, nationally, pending a trial on the merits.' His decision immediately halts the ban nationwide, covering the plaintiffs in the case and all similarly situated service members, including those stationed overseas. Related: Federal judge blocks Trump's transgender military ban 'The government's arguments are not persuasive, and it is not an especially close question on this record,' Settle wrote in the ruling. 'The government's unrelenting reliance on deference to military judgment is unjustified in the absence of any evidence supporting 'the military's' new judgment reflected in the Military Ban—in its equally considered and unquestionable judgment, that very same military had only the week before permitted active-duty plaintiffs (and some thousands of others) to serve openly. Any evidence that such service over the past four years harmed any of the military's inarguably critical aims would be front and center. But there is none.' The decision in Commander Emily Shilling et al. v. United States et al. is the second federal injunction issued against the 2025 ban. Two weeks ago, Judge Ana C. Reyes of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia issued a preliminary injunction in Talbott v. United States, also finding the administration's policy unconstitutional. Reyes wrote that the ban failed intermediate scrutiny and appeared motivated by anti-trans animus. That ruling is now being appealed. Thursday's injunction comes just in time: the Pentagon had announced that enforcement would begin Friday through forced separations of openly transgender service members. That action is now blocked. Related: Fireworks in D.C. courtroom as judge hears DOJ request to undo block on trans military ban Lambda Legal and the Human Rights Campaign Foundation filed the Shilling lawsuit in February on behalf of seven active-duty transgender service members, a transgender person seeking to enlist, and the Seattle-based Gender Justice League. 'This decision affirms what we have long maintained: that banning Americans from military service solely because they are transgender is not only unconstitutional but undermines our national security and military readiness,' said Kell Olson, counsel at Lambda Legal. Sarah Warbelow, legal vice president of the Human Rights Campaign Foundation, called the ruling 'a win for our nation's brave servicemembers and affirms their sacrifices and commitment to our Armed Forces are to be venerated—not callously disregarded by slapshot policies.'
Yahoo
28-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Second judge blocks Trump policy banning transgender service members
A federal judge in Washington state on Thursday blocked enforcement of President Trump's order to bar transgender troops from serving openly in the military, the second judge to halt the policy from taking effect nationwide. In a 65-page ruling, Judge Benjamin Hale Settle of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington said the Trump administration had offered no evidence to support removing transgender service members, who served without issue under the Biden administration, from the military. 'The government's arguments are not persuasive, and it is not an especially close question on this record,' Settle, an appointee of former President George W. Bush and a retired captain in the U.S. Army Judge Advocate General's Corps, wrote in his decision. 'The government's unrelenting reliance on deference to military judgment is unjustified in the absence of any evidence supporting 'the military's' new judgment reflected in the Military Ban—in its equally considered and unquestionable judgment, that very same military had only the week before permitted active-duty plaintiffs (and some thousands of others) to serve openly.' 'Any evidence that such service over the past four years harmed any of the military's inarguably critical aims would be front and center.' Settle wrote. 'But there is none.' A federal judge in Washington, D.C., similarly blocked implementation of Trump's order last week, ruling the policy is 'soaked in animus.' The Pentagon is appealing that decision. On Monday, a third federal judge in New Jersey temporarily blocked the military from separating two transgender Air Force members in a more limited ruling. Shannon Minter, legal director at the National Center for Lesbian Rights, one of the groups representing the plaintiffs in each case, said Thursday in a statement that the harms associated with Trump's ban on trans military service 'are gut wrenching.' 'In each of these cases, the government did not even attempt to claim that any evidence supported its position. There is no reason to discharge individuals who are serving capably and honorably,' Minter said. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
