Biden-Appointed Federal Judge Freaks Out on Trump DOJ Attorney Over Transgender Pronouns in Military
The article reports on a recent confrontation between U.S. District judge Ana C. Reyes and Justice Department attorney Jason C. Lynch regarding former President Donald Trump’s executive order to prohibit the military from using preferred pronouns for transgender personnel. During a court hearing, Judge Reyes expressed strong disapproval of Trump’s order, questioning how it might impact military readiness and insisting that such use of pronouns does not affect military preparedness. she described the order as “arguably rampant with animus,” reflecting biases against transgender individuals.
Reyes’s comments suggest a personal agenda that may interfere with legal objectivity,as she did not cite specific laws that the Trump administration had violated. The piece criticizes this stance as judicial activism, claiming it prioritizes personal beliefs over legal standards. The article concludes by indicating that Judge Reyes plans to delay her ruling untill the Pentagon outlines how it will adhere to Trump’s directive, hinting at her disapproval of the law’s applicability concerning ideological beliefs.
Activist federal judges are on a mission to stop President Donald Trump.
On Tuesday, NBC News reported a spat between U.S. District Judge Ana C. Reyes and Justice Department attorney Jason C. Lynch over Trump’s executive order directing the military to stop using preferred pronouns.
From Reyes’ comments relayed by NBC, she seemed very upset that the Trump administration would try to purge transgender ideology from the military.
When Reyes asked Lynch how using preferred pronouns would impact military preparedness during Tuesday’s hearing, he was only able to get out, “I don’t …”
She then proceeded to cut off any answer he could give, saying, “Because it doesn’t.”
“Because any common sense, rational human being understands that it doesn’t,” Reyes added.
Reyes appeared to go on a rant, saying it was, “ridiculous” to believe military personnel are affected by using fellow servicemembers’ preferred pronouns.
In January, several transgender servicemembers sued to block Trump’s order, which also banned trans people from joining the military.
Reyes referred to Trump’s order as “arguably rampant with animus.”
Those plaintiffs suing to block the order made similar claims, saying, “Rather than being based on any legitimate governmental purpose, the ban reflects animosity toward transgender people because of their transgender status.”
From the comments reported by NBC, Reyes doesn’t appear to cite any actual law the Trump administration is in violation of with this order. Instead, she chooses more abstract and subjective notions, like “common sense” and being “rational.”
To be sure, common sense and rationality should be front and center in judges’ minds but should guide those judges in interpreting the law as it is written.
Those principles are not to be appropriated for personal ends as Reyes is doing here.
This is judicial activism in essence: putting the law on the periphery, so one’s own agenda can guide decisions.
To entertain Reyes’ arguments and provide a response — yes, preferred pronouns are to the detriment of military preparedness.
Language policing servicemembers and badgering them with others self-delusion can only sow dissent.
There is also something ridiculous about an American-born president finding opposition in a foreign-born activist judge. (Reyes is from Uruguay.)
Reyes plans to withhold ruling on Trump’s order until the Pentagon releases its plan for how its policies will comply with Trump’s order, but her comments Tuesday show her hand.
The law is not going to impede ideology.
Advertise with The Western Journal and reach millions of highly engaged readers, while supporting our work. Advertise Today.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
Now loading...