In 2017, our Bigot-in-Chief, who was then newly elected, announced that he was not planning to move forward with President Obama’s plan that would allow all transgender people to be recruited into the military. Trump said he planned to in fact BAN trans people completely and that those currently serving would be discharged.
Trump’s directive also bans the Department of Health and Human Services from providing medical regimens to transgender people currently serving, which would mean that any hormonal treatments they are receiving would be cut off causing great risk to their health and livelihood.
‘”After consultation with my Generals and military experts, please be advised that the United States Government will not accept or allow transgender individuals to serve in any capacity in the U.S. Military,” Trump said in a series of tweets. “Our military must be focused on decisive and overwhelming victory and cannot be burdened with the tremendous medical costs and disruption that transgender in the military would entail.”‘
As you might expect, Trump received massive pushback from the LGBT community, and rightfully so. He also received pushback from Congress, who voted AGAINST Trump’s military ban.
But none of this stopped Trump, because he tried yet again to move forward with his bigoted plan and just recently signed another directive and appealed to a Federal Court to put a hold on Congress’s ruling to prohibit the government from enforcing its ban on transgender people serving in the military. However, his appeal was denied today.
According to The Hill:
‘A federal district court judge on Friday denied the Trump administration’s request to block or limit the scope of a ruling that temporarily prohibits the government from enforcing its ban on transgender people serving in the military.
‘Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, a Clinton appointee on the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, said the court is not convinced the government will suffer irreparable harm without a stay of the court’s October 2017 preliminary injunction.’
The government is trying, in the very least, to limit the scope of the Court’s injunction saying that it could impact the military’s readiness, to which Judge Kollar-Kotelly replied:
‘Without supporting evidence, defendants’ bare assertion that the Court’s injunction poses a threat to military readiness is insufficient to overcome the public interest in ensuring that the government does not engage in unconstitutional and discriminatory conduct.
‘After all, ‘it must be remembered that all Plaintiffs seek during this litigation is to serve their nation with honor and dignity, volunteering to face extreme hardships, to endure lengthy deployments and separation from family and friends, and to willingly make the ultimate sacrifice of their lives if necessary to protect the Nation, the people of the United States, and the Constitution against all who would attack them.’
Appeals Court arguments are scheduled for December 10.
Featured image via Wikimedia Commons