Hegseth Proposes a Challenge to Judge Blocking Military Transgender Ban
“When the person suffers from a diagnosable mental illness and requires daily infusions of hormones and other drugs as well as surgery at government expense to live their best fantasy life, they shouldn’t be allowed near weapons, ammunition, or explosives.”
Last week saw yet another wave of temporary restraining orders and preliminary injunctions from an apparently endless supply of district court judges willing to compromise their reputations and integrity in an effort to block President Donald Trump’s agenda.
Among them was District Judge Ana Reyes (District of Columbia) who issued an injunction blocking the implementation of Trump’s executive order to ban transgender individuals from enlisting or serving in the military.
Recognizing that Reyes, a highly partisan lesbian judge from Uruguay, lacks an understanding of the potential problems a transgender individual’s presence could create for the military, especially in wartime, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth proposed a challenge.
In a Saturday post on X, he suggested: “Since ‘Judge’ Reyes is now a top military planner, she/they can report to Fort Benning at 0600 to instruct our Army Rangers on how to execute High Value Target Raids…after that, Commander Reyes can dispatch to Fort Bragg to train our Green Berets on counterinsurgency warfare.”
Huzzah Secretary.
Since “Judge” Reyes is now a top military planner, she/they can report to Fort Benning at 0600 to instruct our Army Rangers on how to execute High Value Target Raids…after that, Commander Reyes can dispatch to Fort Bragg to train our Green Berets on counterinsurgency warfare. https://t.co/CNrl252Irs
— Pete Hegseth (@PeteHegseth) March 22, 2025
Judge Reyes was confirmed by the Senate two years ago by a vote of 51-47. At the time, The Washington Blade, “America’s LGBTQ News Source,” touted Reyes as “the first Latino woman and the first openly LGBTQ person to serve as a judge on the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.”
Before her confirmation, Reyes was a partner at the D.C.-based law firm Williams and Connolly. Quoting from her biography on the firm’s website, The Blade reported Reyes had focused on legal issues “ranging from foreign immunity to international contract disputes to patent enforcement.”
“Besides this work, for more than a decade Ana has devoted significant time to her pro bono representations of asylum seekers and refugee organizations, including numerous appellate matters for the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and impact litigation for Human Rights First,” according to Williams and Connolly.
We get the picture. There is nothing in her resume that qualifies her to make policy decisions for the military. A closer look at how Reyes arrived at her reckless and ill-advised ruling shows just how far out over her skis she is.
Paul Biegler, a district attorney, took a deep dive into the case and reported his findings in a detailed thread on X. For starters, Reyes cited the Broadway musical “Hamilton” in her decision. Even fans who loved the play admit “it is not entirely fact-based and includes some fictionalized elements for dramatic effect.”
1/ You might have been flabbergasted by the recent order from U.S. District Court Judge Ana C. Reyes, where she cited the musical “Hamilton” in overturning the Trump Admin’s decision to restrict transgenders from serving in the U.S. Military.
But that’s just the beginning… pic.twitter.com/Po8VOFRhfl
— Paul Biegler, D.A. (@FrankCapraJr) March 21, 2025
Biegler notes that “during a routine hearing” about Trump’s executive order “where the only issues were ripeness of the case and ultimate likelihood of success, Judge Reyes took issue with the Admin’s assertion that there were only two sexes, leading to [an] astounding footnote.”
[T]his executive order is premised on an assertion that’s not biologically correct. There are anywhere near about 30 different intersex examples. So, someone who does not have just an XX or XY chromosome is not just male or female; they’re intersex. …
3/ During a routine hearing regarding the Admin’s transgender military EO where the only issues were ripeness of the case and ultimate likelihood of success, Judge Reyes took issue with the Admin’s assertion that there were only two sexes, leading to this astounding footnote: pic.twitter.com/LPXpr7KkZ8
— Paul Biegler, D.A. (@FrankCapraJr) March 21, 2025
[The rest of Biegler’s thread can be viewed by clicking on the first post.]
Referring to Reyes’s use of “Hamilton” as evidence in a legal case, Harvard Law School professor Adrian Vermeule joked that he “[w]ould honestly prefer Berdyaev’s footnote ‘it was revealed to me in a dream.'”
Would honestly prefer Berdyaev’s footnote “it was revealed to me in a dream” pic.twitter.com/wXPYHj3XXf
— Adrian Vermeule (@Vermeullarmine) March 19, 2025
RedState’s Streiff, an Army veteran, provided an interesting perspective:
No one has an inherent right to serve in the Armed Forces. When the person suffers from a diagnosable mental illness and requires daily infusions of hormones and other drugs as well as surgery at government expense to live their best fantasy life, they shouldn’t be allowed near weapons, ammunition, or explosives. From what we’ve seen of the impact of transgender “women” on women’s athletic teams, you’d have to be a moron not to think they would have a much more deleterious effect while living in close quarters in barracks or deployed.
It is easy for Reyes to make the decisions she’s made so far because she has never served in the military and will never have to live with the consequences of her actions.
The Democrats’ relentless use of lawfare to obstruct Trump’s agenda has reached the point of insanity. This week, two bills will be introduced in Congress to address the issue, but the most effective and immediate solution would be intervention by Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts. He must take action now—failure to do so would be a clear dereliction of duty.
Elizabeth writes commentary for Legal Insurrection and The Washington Examiner. She is an academy fellow at The Heritage Foundation. Please follow Elizabeth on X or LinkedIn.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
“There is nothing in her resume that qualifies her to make policy decisions for the military.”
For that matter, there’s nothing in her resume that indicates she’s qualified to consider complex legal questions concerning the Constitution, national security, or presidential authority.
Riddle me this:
If past presidents maintained a policy of “no trans” in the military, why can’t a current POTUS revert to that same policy? Is this a one-way street, with no lane going in the opposite direction and no turn-arounds? What if it was a social experiment (it was, at least in part) and DOD is not satisfied with its results?
Forget policy decisions. The judiciary now feels emboldened to intrude into military matters, a place civilian judges have no right being. The military even has it’s own judicial system to deal with matters which are unique to them. Who serves is one of them. For the judges to think they are the ones that decide military matters is beyond dangerous. This crazy judge needs to be removed from the bench as much for this ridiculous ruling as the lack of judgement she shows.
Umm. The article is about her intrusion into military matters. I was commenting on the appearance she’s not qualified to hear cases involving more than military matters, the article having already made that clear.
I was not quibbling with you but making a follow up comment.
The military is subject to the law and the constitution. If an Article 3 judge believes a military practice is contrary to the constitution or to any law, it is very much that judge’s place to order the military to cease that practice, and the judge outranks any military tribunal.
Of course this is not the case here, but Reyes seems to believe it is, so given her premise she’s within her lane.
Nope. Who serves in the military, the qualifications that the military make policy to provide an effective military is off limits to all except the military chain of command and considering the unique structure needs to be. Article 3 judges have zero jurisdiction over such things.
This isn’t entirely true. Congress has the authority to make laws pertaining to the US military. They could pass a law stating that you can only keep people out of the military for flat feet, and for no other reason. But they have NOT done so, and would not do so, because they don’t have enough insane members yet. And, therefore, Judge Reyes has zero “standing” on this issue.
That is wrong, and an outright rebellion against the constitution. The military has no rights whatsoever, it has no right even to exist, outside the law and the constitution, and the power to say what the law and the constitution are is entirely in the hands of the judicial branch.
The military is not special, and is not exempt from the law. It is part of the executive branch and thus has no power to interpret the law. If it ignores the law it is in mutiny and must be suppressed.
Why is it you can be counted on to try to offer apologia for the Democrat position?
She would say those presidents were wrong and in violation of the constitution, and Biden finally brought the military into compliance for the first time ever.
And would call it “Progress.”
If past presidents maintained a policy of “no trans” in the military, why can’t a current POTUS revert to that same policy?
Because of this thing called “Progress.” Yes, it’s entirely a one-way ratchet, with “progress” being defined as “advancing the Progressive religion to total domination.” That means especially hedonism and transhumanism.
We have enough nutjobs in this country, Why do we have to import them and what’s worse, make them judges, You can’t despise those democrats who voted for this loonytoon enough.
I’m sure many Republicans (the party of invertebrates) supported her.
“Judge Reyes was confirmed by the Senate two years ago by a vote of 51-47”.
So no, there were not “many Republicans” who supported her. In fact only two.
Ztakd, we did not “import” her. She immigrated with her parents when she was a child, in the normal (and legal) fashion.
“When the person suffers from a diagnosable mental illness and requires daily infusions of hormones and other drugs ”
that should eliminate them right away, treat them the same way the military treats insulin dependent diabetics, if you are discovered to be insulin dependent you are discharged right away
“When the person suffers from a diagnosable mental illness…”
Well, now you’re attacking the judge.
Insulin dependency is an immutable characteristic, which apparently the armed forces can discriminate against. What they can’t discriminate against is mutable characteristics like gender.
Because Civil Rights Act, or something.
It’s Lawfare from the Cultural Marxist
Pete Hegseth channeling his inner Col. Nathan Jessup.
It’s time for Congress to shorten the leash on federal courts. From venue shopping to nationwide injunctions, things are clearly broken and must be addressed.
We can’t expect SCOTUS to fix it for us. We elect legislators to do this stuff. If they’re not willing then we need to elect replacements that will.
Perhaps we also need a natural born citizen requirement for federal judges too. I’m not liking this concept of an immigrant, no matter who she sleeps with, being on the bench.
Legislators are the very definition of cowards. Always passing the buck. It’s how we ended up with all those unaccountable three letter agencies making rules that are the province of the legislature.
That would require a constitutional amendment, and I’m 99% sure it wouldn’t get nearly enough support.
Do you want to do the same for Congress?! How about for heading government departments?
Yes. Because its already being exploited.
She’s not even
Born in
America, has the IQ of a meth addict after 20 years of hard usage
What are we doing here America
Elon, fire her off to Mars, please!
We like Mars. Fire to a useless place, like Mercury.
Venus!
Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus.
Lesbos!
Blame the State Department and Legacy IN&S.
Visas for everyone! Come one, come all!
Military readiness is not a justiciable issue it is up to the Executive via policy and the Congress via statutes, funding authorization and confirmation of Officers. The notion of Tranny serving decreases our National Security posture both indirectly (see lowered recruiting # during the period where Tranny allowed) and directly see lowered retention rates and not for nothing but a Tranny isn’t deployable… which is a flipping problem for military readiness.
SCOTUS has got to take a couple of these cases and make very clear rulings to reinforce the bright line limits of Judicial authority. If they keep ducking that then they will be inviting Congress and the Executive to redraw the lines for them. I suspect that the Judicial Branch will definitely NOT like the outcome of a motivated reform effort imposed onto the Judicial Branch.
I think they’re hoping (at least the ones most interested in the “reputation” of the court) that Congress will step in. They (much like Congress) would much prefer others to make the decisions and have to take responsibility.
Of course, if they would limit themselves to their actual Constitutional job, they wouldn’t have to make these decisions. “Dude, that’s your job. Don’t pass the buck to me.”
This was once revealed to me in a dream. — Nicolas Berdyaev
“an apparently endless supply of district court judges willing to compromise their reputations and integrity”
Objection! Assuming facts not in evidence. What “reputations and integrity”?
When my son enlisted in the USMC, circa 1998, a history of childhood asthma was disqualifying. Not current asthma, but long ago, no recurrence.
Slow Joe was deferred due to asthma which didn’t interfere with his storied lifeguard career and taking down Corn Pop.
Correct. I’m a pulmonary physician and that’s been the rule in the armed forces for a long time.
Should the DoD simply ignore the order on the grounds that it is not within the authority of the judiciary? Any following order by this hack to arrest/detain the SecDef can simply be ignored as well?
That’s certainly one option the administration should consider. But they only get one bite at that cherry, so the case they pick for it should be as solid as possible . They should consult widely, and if there’s any feedback that the court order may be valid then they should obey it and wait for a better opportunity to have that fight. It has to be had, and can’t be rushed.
You can lose all the pejoratives and the message remains the same. When a person requires daily infusions of hormones and other drugs they don’t belong in the military. Full stop. The military is for people who are physically fit and if necessary can be deployed to an isolated location for months.
Actually, no.
Physical illness is one reason for someone not to be in the military.
Mental illness is a second, equally valid reason.
Both should be mentioned.
The more a Dhimmi-crat “judge” appointed to the federal bench touts (or, on whose behalf Dhimmi-crat media touts) his/her ethnicity, skin pigmentation, sexual orientation or sex, especially as constituting some allegedly historic “first,” it can be taken as axiomatic that he or she is a legal lightweight and committed leftist radical/activist who is manifestly unqualified for the job.
See the example of the dim-witted, self-congratulatory and narcissistic Latina. sitting on SCOTUS; among too many other examples to name.
And Jonah Goldberg called Hegseth’s tweet “juvenile.”
/eyeROLL/
Nothing about the lack of jurisdiction of the judge in this case, or anything.
WTH happened to you, Jonah?
just ban it. Issue a verbal f u to courts. ‘Sometimes there is only that which must be done’
Leave a Comment