In an exchanged on Tuesday, a federal judge pressed the Department of Justice for an executive order of President Donald Trump that ordered the military to stop using preferred pronouns, arguing that there was no link between pronouns and military preparation.
The American district judge Ana C. Reyes had asked the Department of Justice to explain how the use of pronoun would affect military preparation during a hearing in the Trump order.
“I don’t …” said Justice lawyer Jason C. Lynch, before the judge interrupted him.
“Because it is not so,” said Reyes. “Because any rational human being of common sense understands that it does not.”
Reyes, who was appointed for the bank by former President Joe Biden in 2023, also challenged Lynch to find a commissioned military officer who testified that the use of preferred pronouns decreased military preparation.
She continued saying that the idea that anyone in the army is affected by having to use another person’s favorite pronouns is “ridiculous.”
A group of members of the transgender service and possible members of the service demanded to block Trump’s order last month that prohibits transgender people from getting ready or serve in the army.
The order also ordered the Department of Defense to “end the use of pronoun invented and based on identification”, and that prohibits men assigned at birth to use facilities reserved for women in the Armed Forces.
In a one -one complaint filed this month, the plaintiffs had argued that Trump’s order “does not confer authority in the Secretary of Defense to depart from this directive”, and that, as a result, “no member of the service that is transgender can be enlisted or continue with your military service. “
The Department of Justice said Tuesday that the Pentagon had discretion to formulate policies that do not automatically prohibit all people with gender dysphoria to serve.
“I do not believe that the Secretary of Defense has so much ambiguity in his mind in terms of what the executive order clearly requires,” said Reyes, referring to the Pete Hegseth movement to immediately stop all accessions for those with a “dysphoria story gender “and any procedure related to planned gender transition.
During another round trip with the lawyer of the Department of Justice, Reyes also said that Trump’s order is “possibly unbridled with Animus.”
She cited parts of the order and asked Lynch if she considered that those descriptions of transgender people were degrading. He left aside and did not respond directly.
The plaintiffs had argued on their demand that “instead of based on any legitimate governmental purpose, the prohibition reflects the animosity towards transgender people due to their transgender status.”
The parties are scheduled to meet on Wednesday, but Reyes has said that he will not govern the matter until the Pentagon releases an expected report next week that details the plans to review their policies to comply with the Trump order.
Another audience is scheduled for March 3, after launching the report.
In 2017, Trump announced a military prohibition that prohibits relief to transgender open people. Several federal judges blocked the policy of taking effect after GLBTQ defenders and legal defenders and the National Lesbian Rights Center, the same legal groups that represent the plaintiffs in the current case, filed a lawsuit.
The judges said at that time that politics probably described as unconstitutional discrimination and rejected the administration’s military preparation. In 2019, the Supreme Court allowed the implementation of policy while the legal challenges took place in the lower courts.
