Austin American-Statesman

Transgende­r troop ban halted by judge

Service members were likely to win their suit over policy, judge rules.

- By David Crary and Jessica Gresko

A federal judge Monday barred President Donald Trump’s administra­tion from proceeding with plans to exclude transgende­r people from military service.

U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly ruled that the transgende­r service members who had sued over Trump’s policy were likely to win their lawsuit. She directed a return to the situation that existed before Trump announced his new policy this summer, saying the administra­tion had provided no solid evidence for why a ban should be implemente­d.

Trump had ordered a reinstatem­ent of the long-standing policy that barred transgende­r individual­s from joining the military; service members who were revealed to be transgende­r were subject to discharge. Under President Barack Obama, that policy was changed last year to allow

transgende­r people to serve openly.

The Trump administra­tion may appeal Kollar-Kotelly’s decision, but for now, the proposed ban remains unenforcea­ble under Kollar-Kotelly’s preliminar­y injunction.

“We disagree with the court’s ruling and are currently evaluating the next steps,” said Justice Department spokesman Lauren Ehrsam.

She reiterated the department’s view that the lawsuit was premature because the Pentagon was still in the process of reviewing how the transgende­r policy might evolve.

One of the attorneys handling the lawsuit, Shannon Minter of the National Center for Lesbian Rights, said the ruling was an enormous relief to his clients.

“Their lives have been devastated since Trump first tweeted he was reinstatin­g the ban,” Minter said. “They are now able to serve on equal terms with everyone else.”

Trump announced on Twitter in July that the government “will not accept or allow transgende­r individual­s to serve in any capacity in the U.S. Military.”

He followed with an August memo directing the Pentagon to extend indefinite­ly a ban on transgende­r individual­s joining the military, and gave Defense Secretary Jim Mattis six months to come up with a policy on “how to address” those who are currently serving.

Under the Obama administra­tion, the Department of Defense had announced in 2016 that service members could not be discharged solely based on their gender identity.

Transgende­r individual­s were to be allowed to enlist in the military in June 2017, a timeline initially delayed under the Trump administra­tion to Jan. 1, 2018.

Minter said the new court ruling means they will be able to enlist as of that date.

The Trump administra­tion had asked the court to dismiss the lawsuit; Kollar-Kotelly refused to do so, and Minter said it’s possible the case will go to trial.

One issue not directly addressed in Monday’s ruling was whether federal funds should be used to pay for sexual reassignme­nt surgeries for members of the military.

The administra­tion has sought to prohibit such payments; Kollar-Kotelly said she didn’t have jurisdicti­on to rule on the issue because none of the plaintiffs in the case establishe­d a likelihood of being impacted by that prohibitio­n.

The lawsuit was filed in August by the National Center for Lesbian Rights and GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders on behalf of eight transgende­r individual­s, including service members in the Air Force, Coast Guard and the Army, as well as students at the U.S. Naval Academy and in the ROTC program at the University of New Haven.

The Justice Department, in seeking the lawsuit’s dismissal, said none of the plaintiffs had establishe­d that they will be impacted by current policies on military service.

The two advocacy groups who filed the lawsuit assailed that assertion.

They highlighte­d the uncertaint­y facing Regan Kibby, the transgende­r Naval Academy student who — because of Trump’s action — was unsure whether he would be able to join the Navy on graduation.

Kollar-Kotelly said the plaintiffs clearly establishe­d that they would be harmed by the administra­tion’s directives.

She also contended that the plaintiffs were likely to prevail in arguing that the directives were unconstitu­tionally discrimina­tory — targeting transgende­r people without evidence that their service caused substantiv­e problems for the military.

The directives “do not appear to be supported by any facts,” the judge wrote.

Other lawsuits challengin­g the president’s directive have been filed in Seattle and Baltimore.

Oral arguments are scheduled for Nov. 9 for the Baltimore lawsuit, which was filed by the American Civil Liberties Union on behalf of six transgende­r service members.

“The federal courts are recognizin­g what everyone already knows to be true: President Trump’s impulsive decision to ban transgende­r people from serving in the military service was blatantly unconstitu­tional,” said Joshua Block, senior staff attorney with the ACLU’s LGBT & HIV Project.

The Pentagon has not released data on the number of transgende­r people currently serving, but a Rand Corp. study has estimated between 1,320 and 6,630, out of 1.3 million active-duty troops.

 ?? CAROLYN KASTER / ASSOCIATED PRESS ?? Participan­ts in the Equality March for Unity and Pride walk past the White House in Washington in June. An attorney for those who sued said Monday’s ruling was an enormous relief to his clients.
CAROLYN KASTER / ASSOCIATED PRESS Participan­ts in the Equality March for Unity and Pride walk past the White House in Washington in June. An attorney for those who sued said Monday’s ruling was an enormous relief to his clients.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States