TWIBS: Judge Makes Fools of Justice Department Attorneys
Foolishly attempting to argue in favor of President Trump’s ban on trans troops, DoJ attorneys were made to look like clowns in court.
Humor by Alyssa Steinsiek
This Week in Barrel Scraping (TWIBS) is Assigned Media’s oldest column! Every Friday, Alyssa Steinsiek digs deep from the well of transphobia and finds the most obnoxious, goofy thing transphobes have said or obsessed over during the week and tears it to shreds.
Forgive me, dear readers, for my greatest mortal sin on this earth is that I absolutely cannot resist a good dunk. Are they conducive to good discourse or helpful in any way whatsoever? No, absolutely not. Do they often reek of ineffective liberalism? You bet they do. Am I even slightly capable of resisting a churlish remark delivered to a grating buffoon? No, absolutely not. Obviously.
To absolutely nobody’s surprise, then, I adore when a decent person in a position of power, somebody normal with even a shred of authority, clowns some jabroni who I despise with all my little heart. There are many such cases these days, but my favorite this week is the very thorough, very annoyed dressing down that U.S. District Judge Ana C. Reyes (a Biden appointee) gave Department of Justice attorneys during a hearing on Tuesday regarding the Trump administration’s attempt to ban transgender Americans from serving in the military, and expel existing servicemembers simply for being trans. The suit alleges that this ban violates transgender Americans’ constitutional rights, specifically the Due Process clause of the Fifth Amendment, by discriminating against them “based on their sex and based on their transgender status.”
The executive order, “Prioritizing Military Excellence and Readiness,” was signed by President Trump on January 27th. It makes reference to “radical gender ideology to appease activists” and “political agendas or other ideologies harmful to unit cohesion,” and describes transgender people in general as dishonorable, untruthful, and undisciplined. It also suggests that a change in pronouns would somehow harm the American Armed Forces’ “high standards for troop readiness [and] lethality,” which seems unlikely considering how quickly a they/them appended to an email signature can take out any given Republican at the knees.
Justice Department attorneys’ attempts to obfuscate the intent of the executive order and the malice of the language therein are, in a word, pathetic. Thankfully, Judge Reyes was having absolutely none of that in her courtroom.
When one attorney, Jason Lynch, suggested that the order could possibly be interpreted by the Pentagon in such a way that it would not bar all transgender Americans from service, Judge Reyes answered, “I don’t think the secretary of defense has a lot of ambiguity in his mind as to what the executive order clearly requires.”
Interrupting the Justice Department attorney’s attempt to quibble over supposed guidance issued by the DoJ, Judge Reyes asked, “If we had President Trump here right now, and I said to him, ‘Is this a transgender ban?’ What do you think he would say?”
Lynch answered, “I have no idea, your honor.”
To which Reyes replied, “I do. He would say, ‘Of course it is.’ Because he calls it a transgender ban, because all the language in it is indicative.”
Later, Judge Reyes ally-ooped Lynch by asking how pronouns could possibly affect military readiness, then immediately cutting him off to say, “It doesn’t. We all have a lot bigger problems than pronoun use. We have a military that is incompetent, if that is the case. Any common sense rational human being knows that it doesn’t.”
Delivering a spectacular coup de grâce to the Justice Department’s fumbling attempts to defend the executive order, Judge Reyes challenged Lynch, “If you want to get me an officer of the U.S. military who is willing to get on the stand and say that, because of pronoun usage, the U.S. military is less prepared ... I will be the first to give you a box of cigars.”
The plaintiffs in this lawsuit allege that President Trump “made animosity towards transgender individuals a cornerstone of his campaign for a second term,” though the Justice Department seems to think otherwise.
“[The order] calls an entire category of people dishonest, dishonorable, undisciplined … people who have taken an oath to defend this country … I want to know, from the government, whether that language expresses animus. Does that express animus?” Judge Reyes asked.
The Justice Department attorney responded, “I don’t have an answer for you.”
“You do have an answer, you just don’t want to give it,” Reyes shot back. “We are dealing with the president of the United States … calling [a group of people serving their country] liars.”
The hearing concluded without a verdict, and Reyes stated that she would not make a ruling until after the Pentagon releases a report explaining their plans to comply with the executive order, which is expected next week.
I applaud Judge Reyes’ refusal to let the DoJ weasel their way out of this attack on the constitutional rights of trans servicemembers. However nasty and worrisome things seem, always remember that decent people are out there and more than willing to stick it to toadies like these.
Alyssa Steinsiek is a trans woman journalist who reports on news relevant to the queer community and occasionally posts on BlueSky.
