Connect with us

U.S. Military/Pentagon

U.S. Army considers allowing LGBTQ troops to transfer from hostile states

Proposed guidance remains in draft form

Published

on

Top Army G-1 officer & enlisted advisor speaking with Joint Base Lewis-McChord single and dual military parents (Photo Credit: U.S. Army)

A draft policy is circulating among top officials of the U.S. Army that would allow soldiers to be able to request a transfer if they feel state or local laws discriminate against them based on gender, sex, religion, race or pregnancy.

Steve Beynon writing for Military.com reported last week the guidance, which would update a vague service policy to add specific language on discrimination, is far from final and would need approval from Army Secretary Christine Wormuth. But if enacted, it could be one of the most progressive policies for the Army amid a growing wave of local anti-LGBTQ and restrictive contraception laws in conservative-leaning states, where the Army has a majority of its bases and major commands.

“Some states are becoming untenable to live in; there’s a rise in hate crimes and rise in LGBT discrimination,” Lindsay Church, executive director of Minority Veterans of America, an advocacy group, told Military.com. “In order to serve this country, people need to be able to do their job and know their families are safe. All of these states get billions for bases but barely tolerate a lot of the service members.”

This policy tweak to the existing Army regulations pertaining to compassionate reassignment would clarify the current standard rules, which are oft times fairly vague.

A source in the Army told Beynon the new guidance has not yet been fully worked out through the policy planning process or briefed to senior leaders including the Army secretary or the office of Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin.

“The Army does not comment on leaked, draft documents,” Angel Tomko, a service spokesperson, told Military.com in an emailed statement. “AR 600-100 and 600-200 establish the criteria for which soldiers may request for a compassionate reassignment. The chain of command is responsible for ensuring soldiers and families’ needs are supported and maintain a high quality of life.”

A base member wears rainbow socks during Pride Month Five Kilometer Pride Run at Joint Base Andrews, Md., June 28, 2017.
(U.S. Air Force photo by Airman 1st Class Valentina Lopez)

The Crystal City-based RAND Corporation had published a study on sexual orientation, gender identity and health among active duty servicemembers in 2015 that listed approximate six percent of LGBTQ troops are gay or bisexual and one percent are trans or nonbinary.

A senior analyst for RAND told the Washington Blade on background those numbers are likely much lower than in actuality as 2015 was less than four years after the repeal of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ and prior to when the Trump administration enacted the trans servicemember ban in 2017, which has had a chilling effect on open service.

The Biden administration repealed the Trump ban.

Another factor is that the current 18-24 year old troops colloquially referred to as “Gen Z” are much more inclined to embrace an LGBTQ identity and that would cause the numbers to be higher than reported.

Also factored in is uncertainty in the tweaking of policy in light of the recent leak of the draft U.S. Supreme Court decision that would effectively repeal Roe v. Wade.

According to Military.com it’s unclear whether the Army’s inclusion of pregnancy on the list would protect reproductive care for soldiers if Roe v. Wade is overturned. That language could be intended to protect pregnant service members or their families from employment or other discrimination, but could also be a means for some to argue for transfers based on broader reproductive rights.

One advocacy group pointed out that the current wave of anti-LGBTQ legislation will negatively impact the moral of service members:

“What we’re seeing across the board is a small group of elected officials who are trying to politicize and weaponize LGBTQ identities in despicable ways. They’re not only doing that to our youth, but the collateral damage is hurting our service members,” Jacob Thomas, communications director for Common Defense, a progressive advocacy organization, told Military.com. “[Troops] can’t be forced to live in places where they aren’t seen as fully human.”

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

U.S. Military/Pentagon

Pentagon urged to reverse Naval Academy book ban

Hundreds of titles discussing race, gender, and sexuality pulled from library shelves

Published

on

U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

Lambda Legal and the Legal Defense Fund issued a letter on Tuesday urging U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to reverse course on a policy that led to the removal of 381 books from the Nimitz Library of the U.S. Naval Academy in Annapolis, Md.

Pursuant to President Donald Trump’s executive order 14190, “Ending Radical Indoctrination in K-12 Schooling,” the institution screened 900 titles to identify works promoting “diversity, equity, and inclusion,” removing those that concerned or touched upon “topics pertaining to the experiences of people of color, especially Black people, and/or LGBTQ people,” according to a press release from the civil rights organizations.

These included “I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings” by Maya Angelou, “Stone Fruit” by Lee Lai, “The Hate U Give” by Angie Thomas, “Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong” by James W. Loewen, “Gender Queer: A Memoir” by Maia Kobabe, and “Democracy in Black: How Race Still Enslaves the American Soul” by Eddie S. Glaude, Jr. 

The groups further noted that “the collection retained other books with messages and themes that privilege certain races and religions over others, including ‘The Clansman: A Historical Romance of the Ku Klux Klan’ by Thomas Dixon, Jr., ‘Mein Kampf’ by Adolf Hitler, and ‘Heart of Darkness’ by Joseph Conrad.

In their letter, Lambda Legal and LDF argued the books must be returned to circulation to preserve the “constitutional rights” of cadets at the institution, warning of the “danger” that comes with “censoring materials based on viewpoints disfavored by the current administration.”

“Such censorship is especially dangerous in an educational setting, where critical inquiry, intellectual diversity, and exposure to a wide array of perspectives are necessary to educate future citizen-leaders,” Lambda Legal Chief Legal Officer Jennifer C. Pizer and LDF Director of Strategic Initiatives Jin Hee Lee said in the press release.

Continue Reading

U.S. Military/Pentagon

Air Force rescinds rule barring inclusion of preferred pronouns in email signatures

Conflict with language in military funding package may explain reversal

Published

on

The Pentagon (Photo by icholakov/Bigstock)

The U.S. Air Force has issued a “directive to cease the use of ‘preferred pronouns’ (he/him, she/her, or they/them) to identify one’s gender identity in professional communications,” according to a report published in the Hill on Wednesday.

The rule, which applies to both airmen and civilian employees, was first adopted on Feb. 4 pursuant to President Donald Trump’s anti-transgender executive order called, “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government.”

Days after the administration’s issuance of that order on the first day of the president’s second term, the Office of Personnel Management instructed agencies across the whole of the federal government to remove pronouns from email signatures and enforce the policy barring employees from using them.

Additionally, on Jan. 27 Trump published an order barring trans people from joining the U.S. Armed Forces, indicating that those who are currently in serving would be separated from the military. The Pentagon is fending off legal challenges to the ban in federal courts.

Particularly given the extent of the new administration’s efforts to restrict the rights of trans Americans and push them out of public life, the Air Force’s reversal of the pronoun guidance was surprising.

According to reporting in Military.com, the move might have come because officials concluded the rule was in conflict with language in the military appropriations funding legislation passed by Congress in 2023.

The NDAA established that the defense secretary “may not require or prohibit a member of the armed forces or a civilian employee of the Department of Defense to identify the gender or personal pronouns of such member or employee in any official correspondence of the Department.”

Continue Reading

U.S. Military/Pentagon

Pentagon will identify transgender service members and begin discharging them

Policy goes further than the anti-trans military ban in first Trump term

Published

on

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth (Screen capture: C-SPAN)

The Pentagon on Thursday said that within 30 days it will draft and submit a procedure to identify service members who are transgender and begin discharging them from the military within 30 days of that date.

In his second administration, President Donald Trump has ordered an anti-trans military ban that goes further than the policy introduced during his first term, which only prohibited the military from accepting trans enlistees.

LGBTQ groups and other parties that filed lawsuits managed to significantly delay enforcement of the order for years, and likewise they are challenging the 2025 iteration in multiple federal courts.

On Thursday, New York State Attorney General Letitia James and a coalition of 20 attorneys general filed a brief to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington supporting the plaintiffs in one of those cases.

The White House directed the Pentagon to submit a formal policy detailing how the ban would be enforced via Trump’s Jan. 27 executive order, “Prioritizing Military Readiness and Excellence,”—which, like Thursday’s memo, denigrated trans soldiers and dismissed the sacrifice of their service.

Also per Trump’s directive, earlier this month the military announced it would discontinue providing gender affirming medical care and stop welcoming would-be enlistees who are trans.

Critics argue the administration’s policy doesn’t just fail to strengthen the military or fortify America’s defenses, as promised in the title of Trump’s directive, but it actually imperils those very objectives by separating qualified, proven soldiers at the expense of readiness and preparedness without a reasonable justification for their exclusion.

The Pentagon specified the exemptions would be reserved for only cases “provided there is a compelling government interest in retaining the service member that directly supports warfighting capabilities,” and even then only for service members who demonstrate “36 consecutive months of stability in [their] sex without clinically significant distress.”

Estimates of the number of trans service members range from the low thousands to as many as 15,000.

“The scope and severity of this ban is unprecedented. It is a complete purge of all transgender individuals from military service,” Shannon Minter of the National Center For Lesbian Rights told Reuters.

Other LGBTQ organizations shared statements condemning the memo on Thursday.

SPARTA:

Transgender Americans have served openly and honorably in the U.S. Armed Forces for nearly a decade. Thousands of transgender troops are currently serving, and are fully qualified for the positions in which they serve.

No policy will ever erase transgender Americans’ contribution to history, warfighting, or military excellence. Transgender service members have a unique fighting spirit and will continue to defend the constitution and American Values no matter what lies ahead.

In the meantime, SPARTA Pride continues to stand in solidarity with all transgender service members.

The Human Rights Campaign and Lambda Legal, in a joint statement:

The Human Rights Campaign Foundation and Lambda Legal today condemned the Department of Defense (DoD) guidance implementing the Trump administration’s policy banning transgender individuals from enlisting or continuing to serve in the United States Armed Forces that was issued Feb. 26. The policy institutes a 30-day period to begin separation of any current transgender servicemember currently in the military and has immediate impacts on access to healthcare and treatment of transgender servicemembers.

“A dishonorable action from a dishonorable administration. This attack on those who have dedicated themselves to serving our country is not only morally reprehensible but fundamentally un-American. Forcing out thousands of transgender servicemembers—who have met every qualification to serve—does not enhance military excellence or make our country safer. Instead, the United States will be losing highly trained professionals who serve in roles critical to our national security.  The courage and sacrifice demonstrated by transgender servicemembers in uniform-deserve our utmost respect and protection, not discrimination. This blatant injustice cannot stand, and we look forward to continuing to represent the brave transgender servicemembers in court.” 

Earlier this month, Lambda Legal and HRCF filed a federal lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the Trump administration’s ban on military service by transgender people. The lawsuit—brought in response to the administration’s Jan. 27 executive order—was filed on behalf of six actively serving transgender service members, a transgender person seeking to enlist in the military, and Gender Justice League, a civil and human rights organization headquartered in Seattle.

On Feb. 19, Lambda Legal and HRCF asked the district court to block the trans military ban while the litigation proceeds.

Read more about the case here: https://lambdalegal.org/case/shilling-v-trump/

U.S. Rep. Mark Takano (D-Calif.), chair of the Congressional Equality Caucus:

The contrast between Donald Trump—who cried “bone spurs” to avoid military service—and the countless transgender Americans who serve their country with valor couldn’t be any clearer. Now, Trump’s Department of Defense has taken the latest steps to oust thousands of qualified, dedicated, and deployable servicemembers simply because he doesn’t like who they are. This is morally wrong, unconstitutional, and stupid. 

President Trump’s discriminatory ban will needlessly create gaps in critical chains of command, endanger our national security, and flush millions of dollars spent on training these servicemembers down the drain. Every American who is willing and able to serve should be able to, regardless of how the President feels about their identity. As chair of the Equality Caucus, the largest coalition of members in the House of Representatives, I am committed to seeing this un-American ban undone and working to pass explicit, long-lasting protections for transgender people who sign up to serve their nation into law.

Continue Reading

Popular