Judge Cites Lyrics, Rips Up Constitution In Trans Soldiers Screed

On March 18, another D.C. Circuit judge seized executive branch powers, enjoining the commander-in-chief from disqualifying military recruits with gender dysphoria. District Court Judge Ana Reyes, who identifies as some variety of LGBT, is a longtime Democrat Party donor and, as a lawyer, litigated against the first Trump administration. We knew she’d rule this way, not only because of her bio, but also because in oral arguments she insisted forcing soldiers to lie about reality couldn’t possibly affect military readiness.

In a memorandum accompanying her injunction, the so-called judge writes an opinion screed citing recent court opinions, the Broadway hip-hop play Hamilton, the Supreme Court legislation Bostock v. Clayton County, and corporate news articles. It would be impossible for this theater kid in robes to write a constitutional legal analysis instead, for the Constitution expressly provides in Article II, Section 2, that “The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States.”

Commanders in chief get to set the criteria, expectations, goals, and just about everything else for soldiers. Accordingly, Trump implemented this same policy in his first term. It was 100 percent constitutional then, and it’s 100 percent constitutional now. If Presidents Clinton, Obama, and Biden get to allow queer soldiers, and all the presidents before to discharge them, clearly it is fully within the president’s power to make this decision.

Ignoring this basic aspect of U.S. law and jurisprudence takes Reyes 79 pages, in Cluster B, valley-girl prose. That’s because Reyes is not a judge, she’s an activist who doesn’t deserve a place on any judicial bench — or in any courtroom at all (except as a defendant). That much is obvious from her opinion, as well as from her background.

“Yes, the Court must defer. But not blindly,” Reyes writes, dismissing her duties with a limp-wristed flick of the keyboard. “The President issued [Executie Order] 14183 within seven days of taking office, and Secretary Hegseth issued the Policy thirty days later. There is no evidence that they consulted with uniformed military leaders before doing so. Neither document contains any analysis nor cites any data.”

None of this matters at all. The president’s constitutional powers are not legally subject to second-guessing activist judges making up laws as they go along. Even if the president provided 5,000 pages of evidence to back up his policies, everyone knows this judge and many others would sweep that aside to rule based on their private political preferences.

In junior-high “oh, snap” prose with an almost-audible vocal fry, Reyes claims she’s gotten “Crickets from defendants on th[e] key question” of why the Trump administration won’t enlist soldiers so delusional that, unlike even day-old babies, they can’t tell the difference between men and women. Give it another five years — “judges” like her will be inserting GIFs into “opinions” they release via BlueSky.

Reyes goes on to misquote and misapply the U.S. Declaration of Independence, referencing it via the theater production Hamilton to alter the wording from “all men are created equal” to “all people are created equal.” It seems Reyes has adopted the false and prejudiced view that the founders didn’t deploy the word “man” in the universal inclusive, as in “mankind.” She’s also adopted the false view that “equal” means “exactly the same,” something the founders never said nor believed because that is obviously stupid.

The founders knew affirming human equality doesn’t mean all people have the same talents and abilities, for we manifestly do not. The “equality” they meant a just government should provide was the equal security of its citizens’ rights and liberties. Nobody has a constitutional right to publicly flaunt his fetishes in the U.S. military, or anywhere else. Anyone who makes up arguments that allegedly justify such malevolent sickness disqualifies herself from all public respect.

The founders also didn’t believe “liberty” means “I get to do whatever I want.” They believed it means “free to do what is right.” Everyone with a conscience understands it’s irrational and evil to put men who bill taxpayers for “neovaginas” in charge of airplanes, machine guns, and cannons. This isn’t republican liberty, it’s demonic suicide. Any judge who doesn’t understand these truly Constitution 101 concepts should be run off the bench as a threat to American lives, liberties, and happiness.

Reyes further claims Americans with gender dysphoria have a “constitutional right” to serve in the U.S. military. First, tell that to the Americans with ADHD, obsessive-compulsive disorder, poor eyesight, heart trouble, epilepsy, diabetes, asthma, allergies, and numerous other mental and physical health conditions that disqualify them from enlisting.

Second, thank you, Neil Gorsuch, for providing cover for queer activists like Reyes to make such insane and false claims. In his badly reasoned, politicized 5-4 opinion in Bostock v. Clayton County, Gorsuch claimed treating men and women differently “penalizes a person identified as male at birth for traits or actions that it tolerates in an employee identified as female at birth. Again, the individual employee’s sex plays an unmistakable and impermissible role in the discharge decision.”

As I wrote in my recent book, that’s just plain “Wrong. A man who dresses up as a woman is not analogous to a woman dressing up as a woman. He’s analogous to a woman dressing up as a man. An employer firing an employee for cross-dressing is firing people not for their sex, but for their behavior. Gorsuch’s scenario doesn’t just change the participants’ sex but also their behavior, as Justices Alito and Kavanaugh noted in their dissents.”

As I also explain, the ruling shows a Supreme Court majority has no idea how sex works because two men cannot perform the same genital interactions as a man and a woman. (In case you’re confused, that’s because … MEN AND WOMEN DON’T HAVE THE SAME GENITALS. Sweet summer rain, we’re living in a blooming nuthouse.)

Gorsuch performed an act of unconstitutional judicial tyranny in Bostock by personally adding the concept of “gender identity” to federal employment laws concerning “sex.” In so doing, his majority assumed the role of Congress, obliterating its constitutional authority. Crap rulings like these delegitimize not just the Supreme Court but all other courts, and fuel the raging bonfire of judicial incompetence now blazing across screens everywhere.

Not only Reyes, but numerous courts and the Biden White House immediately used Bostock to foist unconstitutional, irrational, and anti-reality edicts on Americans. The Biden administration cited it to force public and private schools to teach gender dysphoria to get federal lunch money, and to force any entity receiving federal grants to push gender totalitarianism on their employees and customers.

Courts went wild with it as well. Reyes runs one of those courts: “The Court agrees with Defendants that Bostock’s holding is cabined to Title VII. But its reasoning is not,” she writes. “The Supreme Court deduced it impossible—end stop—to discriminate against a transgender person without discriminating against that person based on sex.”

The Bostock majority’s act of tyranny did not make Americans think the court is an independent and nonpartisan actor. Even leftists know the Constitution would never allow courts to force presidents to enlist deranged men wearing skirts. That’s why they hate the Constitution.

All rulings like these do is further delegitimize courts and increase resentment against them by the Americans who truly support the rule of law — courts’ only ultimate bulwark against other forms of tyranny, such as an untethered executive and impotent Congress. The same can be said of Chief Justice John Roberts’ choice Tuesday to rebuke Trump rather than judicial outlaws, another action fanning a red flag at stampeding federal courts.

The president’s constitutional authority is not subject to second-guessing by unelected judges who hate the Constitution. It is subject to the consent of the governed, which has been resoundingly granted by this last election.

Numerous federal judges do not defer to the Constitution, because if they did, they wouldn’t be trying to seize the executive branch’s constitutional powers via lawless rulings like Reyes’. They are disqualifying the federal judiciary, and in so doing, erasing its legitimacy in the eyes of the true sovereign, the American people. So far, the Supreme Court is participating.

The way to restore the legitimacy of the courts is to restore their adherence to the United States’ supreme law, not by making and allowing legally unhinged rulings.

Joy Pullmann is executive editor of The Federalist. Her latest book with Regnery is “False Flag: Why Queer Politics Mean the End of America.” A happy wife and the mother of six children, her ebooks include “Classic Books For Young Children,” and “101 Strategies For Living Well Amid Inflation.” An 18-year education and politics reporter, Joy has testified before nearly two dozen legislatures on education policy and appeared on major media including Tucker Carlson, CNN, Fox News, OANN, NewsMax, Ben Shapiro, and Dennis Prager. Joy is a grateful graduate of the Hillsdale College honors and journalism programs who identifies as native American and gender natural. Joy is also the cofounder of a high-performing Christian classical school and the author and coauthor of classical curricula. Her traditionally published books also include “The Education Invasion: How Common Core Fights Parents for Control of American Kids,” from Encounter Books.