U.S. presses to restrict transgender troops
The United WASHINGTON —
States government pressed a federal appeals court Monday to allow the U.S. military to restrict service by transgender men and women, calling it “truly extraordinary” that judges throughout the country have stood in the way of its policy.
Judge Thomas Griffith noted the way in which President Donald Trump announced the initial ban last year on transgender troops in a series of tweets — and to the surprise of military leaders — “was extraordinary, too.”
The exchange in Washington came during oral argument at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit and after three lower court judges have temporarily blocked the restrictions in challenges from civil rights and gay rights organizations. Transgender troops have continued to serve and enlist.
Trump announced the transgender service ban via Twitter in July 2017, and cited what he viewed as the “tremendous medical costs and disruption” transgender military service would cause. The administration’s order reversed President Barack Obama’s policy of allowing transgender men and women to serve openly and to receive funding for sex-reassignment surgery.
Attorneys for active-duty service members went to The debate over transgender people serving in the military is divisive, and these types of controversial stories receive special treatment. We always try to present as much information as possible so that readers can use those facts to reach their own conclusions. To do that, we rely on a variety of sources that represent multiple points of view. Today’s story, for example, includes court arguments from lawyers on both sides of the issue. court to block the policy shift that could subject current transgender service members to discharge and deny them certain medical care.
The court rulings were met with another policy revision early this year from Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis, who issued a plan to bar men and women from the military who identify with a gender different from their biological sex and who are seeking to undergo the medical transition process. The new plan makes exceptions, for instance, for about 900 transgender individuals who are already serving openly and for others who would serve in their biological sex.
The Justice Department has tried to bypass the appeals process by asking the Supreme Court to intervene and rule on the issue this term, but the high court has not yet acted.
The dispute at the D.C. Circuit on Monday centered in part on whether Mattis’ revised policy is substantially different from the president’s initial order. The appeal by the government contends a lower court judge was wrong when she said she could find no evidence transgender troops would harm the military and put Mattis’ proposal on hold nationally while the administration continued its legal fight.
Griffith suggested the government’s requirement that transgender troops serve in their biological sex would force a person to suppress their nature and what it means to be transgender.
“Isn’t that a contradiction in itself ?” Griffith asked. He suggested that “no one can fit into the category you describe.”
Justice Department attorney Briton Lucas emphasized that a person’s transgender status alone was not disqualifying, and noted that a subset of transgender individuals have no interest in transitioning.
That argument was picked up by Judge Stephen F. Williams, who repeatedly referred to transgender individuals who “do not wish to transition,” seeming to make the point that the administration’s policy is not a complete ban.