March 19 (UPI) — A federal judge has blocked the Trump administration’s ban on transgender service members, ruling the policy is discriminatory, unconstitutional and uninformed.
In a strongly worded opinion on Tuesday, U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes of Washington, D.C., issued a preliminary injunction against President Donald Trump’s executive order directing the Department of Defense to bar enlistment of transgender Americans into the armed services and to discharge those already serving in the military.
“The Military Ban is soaked in animus and dripping with pretext. Its language is unabashedly demeaning, its policy stigmatizes transgender persons as inherently unfit and its conclusions bear no relation to fact,” Reyes, a President Joe Biden appointee, wrote in the order. “Thus, even if the Court analyzed the Military Ban under rational basis review, it would fail.”
Trump issued the Prioritizing Military Excellence and Readiness executive order Jan. 27, seven days after taking office.
According to the order, being transgender is inconsistent with U.S. government policy to “establish high standards for troop readiness, lethality, cohesion, honesty, humility, uniformity and integrity.”
The policy was swiftly met with a lawsuit filed by the National Center for Lesbian Rights and GLAD Law on behalf of six active service members and two people seeking enlistment.
In her ruling Tuesday, Reyes said the plaintiffs have more than 130 combined years of military service, serving in roles from senior military science instructor to naval flight officer and have been deployed from Afghanistan to South Korea with one presently in a combat zone.
Their service records, she said, “are Exhibit A for the proposition that transgender persons can have the warrior ethos, physical and mental health, selflessness, honor, integrity and discipline to ensure military excellence.”
The government, during the case, agreed that the defendants have “served honorably” and “have satisfied the rigorous standards” demanded of them, so what is the purpose in discharging them, she asked.
“Crickets from Defendants on this key question,” Reyes wrote.
She said there is “no evidence” that the Trump administration consulted with uniformed military leaders on the ban nor does it cite any analysis or data in support of it.
“They pronounce that transgender persons are not honorable, truthful or disciplined — but Defense counsel concedes that these assertions are pure conjecture,” she said.
She continued by stating the policy singles out transgender Americans on the basis of health concerns that do not hold water.
She said if health concerns were genuine the policy would apply to all people who have received any kind of hormone therapy or genital reconstruction surgery. And the policy, she continued, makes assertions that can only be explained by pretext, pointing to the notion that “pronoun usage in some (still unfathomable) way impacts readiness.”
“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,” she wrote.
Reyes said the preliminary injunction will be in effect from 10 a.m. Friday, giving the government time to consider filing an emergency stay.
“Today’s decisive ruling speaks volumes,” GLAD Law Senior Director of Transgender and Queer Rights Jennifer Levi said in a statement.
“The Court’s unambiguous factual findings lay bare how this ban specifically targets and undermines our courageous service members who have committed themselves to defending our nation.”
