State of California is Now a Plaintiff in Lawsuit Against Trump’s Transgender Military Ban, as Court Grants Attorney General Becerra’s Motion to Intervene

Дом » Национальный/Федеральный » Page 42

AG Becerra, NCLR, GLAD, and Equality California Note Significance of Court Granting the Opportunity to Consider Harm Being Inflicted Upon California’s 92,000 Transgender Residents

(CALIFORNIA, November 17, 2017)—In a significant development in the legal challenge to President Trump’s transgender military ban, last night the U.S. District Court for Central California granted Attorney General Xavier Becerra’s motion to intervene on behalf of the State of California in Стокман против Трампа, a case brought by Equality California and seven individual plaintiffs challenging the ban.

“Our state is home to more than 130,000 active duty military personnel, in addition to more than 56,000 members of the National Guard and Reserves,” said Attorney General Becerra. “We are ready to get to work to defend the rights of transgender service members and those who seek to enlist in our armed forces. In California, we stand together against discrimination and inequality. We look forward to joining as a co-plaintiff in this critically important lawsuit to defend the rights of Californians against President Trump’s prejudicial and discriminatory agenda.”

“This is an important development in the fight to stop Trump’s transgender military ban for good,” said Юридический директор NCLR Шеннон Минтер. “In taking this action, the court recognized the crucial perspective our state with the largest military population brings to bear on the serious question it is being asked to address regarding the harms of this ban. We are grateful to Attorney General Becerra for joining us in this critical case.”

“Today we take another step forward in beating back Trump’s reckless ban,” said GLAD Transgender Rights Project Director Jennifer Levi. “It is incredibly significant to have the state of California – the most populous state in the nation — with us in this fight for service members, for those who wish to enlist, and for the stability and strength of the military.”

“We must stop Trump’s transgender military ban once and for all—too much is at stake for California, and for the nation,” said Equality California Executive Director Rick Zbur. “I want to thank Attorney General Becerra for joining in this effort to stop the ban, which discriminates against our state’s residents, has no rationale for being in place, and makes us less safe. Today’s action by the court makes us even more confident that it will rule decisively against the administration and their reckless policy.”

NCLR and GLAD serve as co-counsel in the case, filed on behalf of Equality California (EQCA) members and seven individual plaintiffs. California Attorney General Xavier Becerra filed a motion to intervene on behalf of the State of California in an effort to protect the State and its 92,000 transgender residents from what he called a “patently discriminatory federal policy,” a motion the court granted earlier today.

Attorney General Becerra’s motion to intervene was based on several arguments, including that implementing Trump’s transgender military ban would:

Impede the California National Guard’s ability to recruit and retain members that would protect the State’s natural resources in times of need,
Force California to violate anti-discrimination laws and discriminate against its own residents in staffing the California National Guard, and
Threaten the State’s ability to safeguard public institutions of higher learning from discrimination in ROTC programs.

The National Guard has been deployed more than 40,000 times since September 11, 2001, and there are currently 18,000 service members in the California National Guard. The Governor of California is the Commander-in-Chief of the California National Guard and relies on it in times of state emergencies, such as the recent massive wildfires across wine country. In 2014, The Williams Institute estimated that 6,700 transgender Americans were serving in the National Guard across the 50 states and found that transgender Americans were twice as likely to be serving or have served in our nation’s military.

Simultaneous to granting the motion to intervene, the court moved the previously scheduled November 20 hearing in Стокман против Трампа to December 11, and requested additional briefing from the parties.

In addition to NCLR and GLAD, plaintiffs in Стокман против Трампа are represented by Latham and Watkins LLP.

###

Равенство Калифорния is the nation’s largest statewide LGBTQ civil rights organization. We bring the voices of LGBTQ people and allies to institutions of power in California and across the United States, striving to create a world that is healthy, just, and fully equal for all LGBTQ people. We advance civil rights and social justice by inspiring, advocating and mobilizing through an inclusive movement that works tirelessly on behalf of those we serve. www.EQCA.org

Посредством стратегических судебных разбирательств, пропаганды государственной политики и образования, Адвокаты и защитники ЛГБТК работает в Новой Англии и на национальном уровне, чтобы создать справедливое общество, свободное от дискриминации по признаку гендерной идентичности и самовыражения, ВИЧ-статуса и сексуальной ориентации. www.GLAD.org

Национальный центр по правам лесбиянок — это национальная юридическая организация, деятельность которой направлена на защиту прав человека и гражданских прав лесбиянок, геев, бисексуалов и трансгендеров посредством судебных разбирательств, пропаганды государственной политики и просвещения общественности. www.NCLRights.org

Transgender Military Ban Arguments Today in Maryland Federal Court

Дом » Национальный/Федеральный » Page 42

(WASHINGTON, D.C., November 9, 2017)—Today, the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland will hear oral arguments in Stone v. Trump, a case brought by the ACLU challenging Trump’s transgender military ban. On October 30, the National Center for Lesbian Rights (NCLR) and GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders (GLAD) scored a major victory in Доу против Трампа, the first federal lawsuit filed against the ban, by securing a nationwide preliminary injunction. NCLR and GLAD issued the following statement in support of today’s arguments in Stone v. Trump:

“Last week, we secured a nationwide injunction that halts Trump’s ban,” said Юридический директор NCLR Шеннон Минтер. “Right now, every transgender service member is protected, and qualified transgender Americans who wish to enlist can do so as of January 1, 2018. But we know this battle is not over—every federal court that declares this ban unconstitutional moves us closer to a permanent end to this nightmare for our dedicated and courageous service members. To our colleagues at the ACLU today, we stand with you.”

“Veterans Day reminds us of the debt we owe to all who serve – and that includes transgender service members who have sacrificed for our country,” said Дженнифер Леви, директор проекта по правам трансгендеров GLAD. “Today’s hearing in Stone v. Trump provides another welcome opportunity for the federal courts to reiterate what we know—that President Trump’s transgender military ban is discriminatory, unconstitutional, and contrary to military reason.”

В Доу против Трампа, NCLR and GLAD argued that Trump’s ban, first announced in a series of tweets, is irresponsible and discriminatory because qualified and able transgender Americans looking to enlist have not been able to do so, and already-serving transgender service members have been demeaned and stigmatized, denied health care, and face uncertain futures including the loss of their professions, livelihoods, health care, and the post-military retirement they have worked hard to earn. And on October 30, U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia Judge Kollar-Kotelly granted NCLR and GLAD’s motion for a nationwide preliminary injunction.

NCLR and GLAD have been at the center of the legal fight challenging President Trump’s military ban since filing Доу против Трампа, the first of four cases filed against the ban, on August 9.

The two organizations are also co-counsel in a second suit challenging the ban, Стокман против Трампа, brought by Равенство Калифорния. Oral argument in Стокман против Трампа is scheduled for Tuesday, November 20 in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.

Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission

Дом » Национальный/Федеральный » Page 42

On June 4, 2018, the United States Supreme Court reversed the original ruling by the Colorado Civil Rights Commission on grounds specific to Masterpiece Cakeshop and this case, finding that the commission had not acted impartially when originally considering the case. This ruling applies only to Masterpiece Cakeshop and does not broadly allow similar businesses to discriminate. In this decision, the Court affirmed the importance of nondiscrimination laws and the need to protect LGBT people from discrimination.

On December 5, 2017, the United States Supreme Court heard oral arguments in this case. Listen здесь or read the transcript.

On October 30, 2017, GLAD and the National Center for LGBTQ Rights (NCLR) submitted an amicus brief urging the United States Supreme Court to affirm the Colorado Court of Appeals’ decision in 2014 that Masterpiece Cakeshop unlawfully discriminated against a gay couple.

This case involves David Mullins and Charlie Craig, who visited Masterpiece Cakeshop in 2012, with Charlie’s mother, to order a cake for their wedding reception. The owner of the bakery, Jack Phillips, informed them that he could not sell them a cake for their wedding because, based on his religious beliefs, he could only sell wedding cakes to different-sex couples.

David and Charlie filed a complaint with the Colorado Civil Rights Commission, which found that the bakery had violated Colorado nondiscrimination law. The bakery does not deny its policy to refuse service to gay couples seeking wedding cakes, and argues that it has a constitutional right to do so based on religious and free speech grounds.

The brief submitted by GLAD and NCLR states that nondiscrimination laws like Colorado’s “seek to assure citizens access to, and equal enjoyment of, the fundamental elements of full participation in civic life: access to homes, jobs, and public accommodations,” and that the exemption from anti-discrimination laws the bakery is seeking “will reach beyond the lives of LGBT persons to harm their children, families, and friends.”

The exemption the bakery seeks “would undermine the compelling goals of public accommodation laws, which were enacted based on the recognition that the discrimination they prohibit both deprives persons of their dignity and denies society the benefits of wide participation in political, economic and cultural life. We urge the Court to reject a rule that would constitutionalize a new right for commercial enterprises to discriminate against individuals because of their membership in a particular group.”

As a nation, we decided a long time ago that businesses that are open to the public should be open to everyone on the same terms, and that includes customers who are lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender. Nobody should be turned away from a business, denied service, fired from their job, or evicted from their home simply because of who they are.

This case has been brought by the ACLU, and the amicus brief was written with assistance from Pierce Atwood LLP.

Блог

Дом » Национальный/Федеральный » Page 42

GLAD Staff Attorney Allison Wright was recently awarded the distinguished Lavender Rhino Award by the History Project, the only organization focused exclusively on documenting, preserving, and sharing the history of Boston’s LGBTQ communities. Named after one of the early symbols of the Gay Liberation Movement, the Lavender Rhino Award is presented to an emerging activist or organization whose impact on the LGBTQ community deserves recognition. Below, in an excerpt from her acceptance speech, Allison reflects on what this award means – both to her and the clients for whom she perseveres.

I am so grateful to the History Project and feel very honored to accept this prestigious award. But the truth is, I feel very undeserving of this award. I feel undeserving because there were many moments in the last five and a half years that I wanted to or did give up fighting for justice. I’ve struggled with being the only Black attorney at GLAD and living in one of the whitest parts of this country. There were times I wanted to quit and other times when I wasn’t sure if I wanted to be a lawyer at all.

My fatigue with working in this movement stems from resistance to change.

The LGBTQ movement is in desperate need of a makeover. We need more attorneys of color working in this movement. We need more people of color in leadership positions. We need to accept that racial and economic justice are LGBTQ issues, and most importantly, we need to be open to thinking differently about how we do our legal work with communities of color.

Unwillingness to make these changes is what will keep the LGBTQ movement from tackling some of our most urgent issues that strike at the heart of poverty and racism, which impacts so many LGBTQ people of color. Now more than ever, we need our white allies to speak out, act up, sometimes step aside to make room for people of color, and be open to change.

It is my hope for a more evolved LGBTQ movement, my love for my Black and Brown queer folks, especially my clients, and the unwavering support from my partner of the last five years – plus a little love from our four -year-old chihuahua, Sofie, that has kept me going over the last five and a half years.

I am still pursuing my dream of being a bad ass litigator because of my former client, a Black transgender 19-year-old woman who suffered chronic homelessness for most of her teenage life, and had the courage to stand up to a homeless shelter that denied her equal services.

I have not given up because my former client. an LGBTI activist from Uganda, risked his life and his safety to fight for his people.

I still fight because the mother of my Black transgender client knew that her daughter was being treated differently at school because of her race and gender.

I stay in this fight because my Latinx client whose personal struggles with addiction, homelessness, and poverty did not stop them from challenging a religiously-affiliated non-profit service organization’s differential treatment of queer people of color.

I accept this award for my clients whose resiliency and courage to stand up for themselves and others led to change not only for them but for others in similar circumstances.

By accepting this award, I am also making a promise to myself and to my queer POC family, that although I may get tired or angry, lost and dismayed, I will never stop advocating for us.

Evans v. Georgia Regional Hospital

Дом » Национальный/Федеральный » Page 42

In October of 2017 GLAD and the National Center for LGBTQ Rights (NCLR), along with 8 other LGBT and civil rights groups submitted an amicus brief urging the United States Supreme Court to grant cert in Evans v. Georgia Regional Hospital. The case involves the harassment and effective termination of Jameka Evans from her job as a hospital security guard, because she is a lesbian.

At issue is the interpretation of Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, and whether the prohibition against sex-based discrimination can be used to protect gay, lesbian and bisexual people against sexual orientation discrimination.

The brief submitted by GLAD, NCLR, and others states:

“In the absence of guidance from this Court, the courts of appeals have developed a fractured and unworkable approach to sex discrimination claims brought by gay, lesbian, and bisexual employees—one premised on a false distinction between discrimination based on sexual orientation and discrimination based on failure to conform to sex stereotypes. As amici explain here, that distinction is fundamentally arbitrary and impossible to apply with any degree of consistency or fairness.”

The case has been brought by Lambda Legal, and the amicus brief was written by Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP. GLAD and NCLR submitted the brief along with the Anti-Defamation League, Family Equality Council, Freedom for All Americans, Human Rights Campaign, Legal Aid Society, the Mazzoni Center, OutServe-SLDN, Services and Advocacy for GLBT Elders, and the Trevor Project.

On the Same Day, Trump Administration Lands Two Punches Against Trans Community: Pushing Courts to Ignore Transgender Military Ban and Rolling Back Federal Employment Discrimination Protections for Transgender Americans

Дом » Национальный/Федеральный » Page 42

Latest Discriminatory Actions, Taking Place Within Hours of One Another, Double Down on Efforts to Degrade LGBT Community

Washington, D.C. – The Trump administration today landed two punches against transgender Americans, first asking the courts to dismiss a legal challenge to President Trump’s ban on military service by transgender people, and then separately rolling back important employment discrimination protections for transgender workers across the country. Taken together, the two actions reinforce an agenda focused on promoting discrimination against some of the nation’s most vulnerable communities, and underscore the importance of the judiciary now more than ever – as one of the only backstops to an administration committed to dismantling rights and protections for LGBT people. The National Center for Lesbian Rights (NCLR) and GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders (GLAD) spoke out against the Department of Justice’s first punch against transgender Americans, following DOJ’s late-night response yesterday in Доу против Трампа, the first of four cases filed to stop President Trump’s transgender military ban, on which NCLR and GLAD are co-counsel. In the government’s ходатайства о прекращении дела и отклонении ходатайства истцов о чрезвычайной помощи, the Trump administration falsely claimed transgender individuals have not yet suffered harm from this policy. GLAD and NCLR, who are set to respond to the government’s motions in court later this month, reiterated the compelling need to put an immediate halt to the ban: transgender Americans seeking to enlist are not able to do so, and currently-serving transgender servicemembers have been demeaned and stigmatized, denied health care, and are facing the loss of their professions, livelihoods, health care, and the post-military retirement they have worked hard to earn. “The government’s response reads like pure fiction,” said Дженнифер Леви, директор проекта по правам трансгендеров GLAD. “It states a fantasy that the President’s announcement of a ban on military service for transgender people has changed nothing. That’s simply not true. Every day this reckless ban stays in place, our military strength is diminished and our country is less safe for it. We are optimistic the Court will see through this smokescreen and halt the ban.” “The President’s attack on transgender service members who have dedicated their lives to serving our country is unconscionable. Rather than even attempting to defend it, the DOJ is asking the court to turn a blind eye to the devastation the President has caused in the lives of real people and real families,” said Шеннон Минтер, юридический директор NCLR. “Because of the President’s ban, smart, dedicated, and idealistic young people like our plaintiffs Regan Kibby and Dylan Kohere are barred from fulfilling their dreams of military service. And transgender people who are already serving have been told that their skills, training, and years of dedicated service are not valued. The ban has left them scrambling to make new plans for their futures, just as it has undermined our nation’s security. This is the exact opposite of how military policy should be made.” Just hours following DOJ’s response (which was filed at nearly midnight with the courts), news reports surfaced revealing DOJ’s reversing of policy that protects transgender workers from discrimination under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, as outlined in a memo circulated internally at the Department yesterday. “The administration’s focus on attacking and degrading transgender people is reaching a fever pitch,” said Levi. “Today’s developments illuminate just how far-reaching and relentless this unprecedented effort to roll back basic protections for LGBT people will be.” Minter added, “Every day, it becomes more clear that the courts are one of the few checks on this accelerating agenda of blatant discrimination, which is why as Trump doubles down on his attack of LGBT people, we are doubling down on our legal strategy.” NCLR and GLAD have been at the center of the legal fight challenging Trump’s military ban since filing Доу против Трампа on August 9 on behalf of five transgender servicemembers. In the weeks since, NCLR and GLAD filed an August 31 motion в Доу asking the court to immediately block the president’s policy and added two named plaintiffs who have had their plans for a career in military service thwarted by the ban – Regan Kibby, a Midshipman at the U.S. Naval Academy and Dylan Kohere, a first-year student at University of New Haven in West Haven, Connecticut and member of the Army Reserve Officers’ Training Corps (ROTC) program. The two organizations are also co-counsel in a second suit challenging the ban, Стокман против Трампа, brought by Equality California. Former and current military leaders strongly oppose the ban. Just last week, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Joseph Dunford, Jr. said that anyone who meets the high standards of the military should be able to serve. Six former military leaders have lent their voices in Доу против Трампа and other legal cases against the ban, including former Secretary of the Army Eric Fanning, the only person to hold senior leadership roles in each of the three military departments and who led the Army during the year-long review of the military’s policy toward transgender servicemembers, and retired Admiral and former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Michael Mullen. Some of the nation’s most senior military leaders have expressed their strong concern about the negative effects of Trump’s ban on military readiness, national security, and morale. The government’s perpetuation of the false narrative that no one is being harmed by this ban underscores the need for the court to intervene and provide emergency relief now.

Стокман против Трампа

Дом » Национальный/Федеральный » Page 42

GLAD and NCLR are co-counsel in Равенство Калифорния‘s lawsuit challenging the transgender military ban, Стокман против Трампа. Equality California is a plaintiff in the suit together with seven individual plaintiffs who are currently serving or have taken steps to enlist.

The three organizations filed a ходатайство о предварительном запрете on October 2, 2017, in the U.S. District Court for Central California to immediately stop the ban and prevent “further irreparable harm” to transgender Americans who are currently serving in the military or have been barred from enlisting. GLAD and NCLR previously filed a motion for preliminary injunction in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia in Доу против Трампа, the first of four lawsuits across the country filed against the Trump Administration’s transgender military ban.

The Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a motion to dismiss and a motion opposing emergency relief in Стокман против Трампа on October 23. GLAD, EQCA, and NCLR slammed the government’s response for ignoring the harms this dangerous policy is inflicting on our nation’s service members and transgender individuals who want to enlist but can’t. Читать далее.

Plaintiffs filed a response to the Government’s Motion to Dismiss on November 6. A hearing was scheduled in Стокман против Трампа on November 20.

On April 25, 2018, GLAD and NCLR filed our opposition to a Trump-Pence Administration request to dissolve the nationwide preliminary injunction that U.S. District Court Judge Jesus G. Bernal issued on December 22, 2017.

On September 18, 2018, Judge Bernal denied the Government’s motion to dissolve the nationwide preliminary injunction.

Also see www.notransmilitaryban.org for the latest information.

СПИСОК ДОКУМЕНТОВ ДЕЛА

Order denying Government’s Motion to Dissolve the Preliminary Injunction, 9/18/18

Трусы

Filing November 6, 2017

Original Supporting Declarations

Истцы:

Former Top Military Leaders:

Medical Expert:

Declaration of George Richard Brown, MD

Government’s Response

Блог

Дом » Национальный/Федеральный » Page 42

Like you, I am still reeling from the vile displays of racism, anti-Semitism, xenophobia, and hate by white supremacists and neo-Nazis in Charlottesville this weekend.

GLAD is fighting back. But we won’t be fighting alone. And neither will you.

GLAD’s strategic plan, Justice 2020, prioritizes racial and economic equality. And we are proud to be part of a movement of civil rights organizations committed to fighting for true justice for all.

The GLAD staff and I compiled this short list of partner organizations doing important work specifically combating racism, anti-Semitism, and Islamophobia. We welcome you to take a look and find out what you can do to counter the hate we continue to witness from around the country.

The Equal Justice Initiative is committed to ending mass incarceration and excessive punishment in the United States, to challenging racial and economic injustice, and to protecting basic human rights for the most vulnerable people in American society.

The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) works to stop the defamation of the Jewish people, and to secure justice and fair treatment to all.

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) works to enhance understanding of Islam, encourage dialogue, protect civil liberties, empower American Muslims, and build coalitions that promote justice and mutual understanding.

Define American is a non-profit media and culture organization that uses the power of story to transcend politics and shift the conversation about immigrants, identity, and citizenship in a changing America.

Indivisible provides resources you can use to organize in your own community – and can help you find an event or rally near you this week.

GLAD firmly believes that an attack on one of us is an attack on all of us. This is not normal. This cannot be who we become. We must denounce extremism immediately, explicitly and collectively. We must stand as one justice movement.

Together, we will resist hate not only in Charlottesville, but everywhere it rears its ugly head.

Доу против Трампа

Дом » Национальный/Федеральный » Page 42

Победа: 25 января 2021 года президент Байден издал указ об отмене запрета на военную службу трансгендеров. С тех пор, как уходящая администрация начала применять этот запрет в апреле 2019 года, преданным делу трансгендерным военнослужащим грозило увольнение, а квалифицированным трансгендерным американцам было запрещено поступать на военную службу, участвовать в программе подготовки офицеров запаса (ROTC) и посещать военные академии. Полный текст заявления можно прочитать здесь. notransmilitaryban.org.

Обновление от 24 августа 2018 г. – Федеральный окружной судья Коллин Коллар-Котелли сегодня вынес решение приказав администрации Трампа раскрыть информацию о своем решении запретить трансгендерным военнослужащим, имеющим иную квалификацию, служить в армии Доу против Трампа, GLAD и NCLR оспаривают запрет администрации Трампа на службу трансгендеров в армии.

Судья Коллар-Котелли также отклонила ходатайства обеих сторон о полном разрешении дела. В своём постановлении судья Коллар-Котелли заявила, что правительство неправомерно отказалось предоставить документы, связанные с его решением об отмене действующей политики и исключении трансгендерных людей из военной службы. Читать далее

Обновление 6 августа 2018 г. – Судья Коллин Коллар-Котелли сегодня отклонила ходатайство администрации Трампа об отклонении дела NCLR и GLAD Доу против Трампа, первый иск, поданный против запрета Трампа-Пенса на службу трансгендеров в армии, и первый иск, добившийся предварительного судебного запрета, не допускающего вступления запрета в силу, пока дело рассматривается в суде. Судья Коллар-Котелли также отклонила ходатайство администрации Трампа об отмене предварительного судебного запрета, который поставил бы под угрозу карьеру почти всех тысяч трансгендеров, находящихся на службе в армии, и позволил бы администрации Трампа начать реализацию запрета. Судья Коллар-Котелли пока не вынесла решения по ходатайству истцов о вынесении решения в порядке упрощенного судопроизводства, которое позволило бы разрешить дело путем вынесения окончательного решения, объявляющего запрет неконституционным и не подлежащим исполнению. Читать далее

Обновление 22 июня 2018 г. – GLAD и NCLR подали наш ответ в поддержку нашего встречного ходатайства о вынесении решения в порядке упрощенного судопроизводства в Доу против ТрампаЕсли судья Коллар-Котелли вынесет решение в пользу истцов, это решение навсегда заблокирует вступление в силу запрета Трампа-Пенса на службу трансгендеров в армии. Сегодняшнее заявление опровергает попытку администрации «зашорить реальность и представить план Мэттиса как нечто иное, чем он, по сути, является: проект, гарантирующий, что ни один трансгендер не будет служить в Вооружённых силах нашей страны «ни в каком качестве». Ответ истцов — последний. в серии заявок это должно произойти до того, как судья Коллар-Котелли определит, может ли она вынести постоянное постановление о блокировке запрета.

Читать далее

Обновление 11 мая 2018 г. – Трансгендерные истцы по запрету на военную службу в Доу против Трампа подал встречное ходатайство о вынесении решения в порядке упрощенного судопроизводства В окружном суде США по округу Колумбия. В ходатайстве истцов утверждается, что неоспоримые факты показать, что запрет, включая политику имплементации решения Мэттиса от 23 марта, нарушает их права на равную защиту и надлежащую правовую процедуру, и что суд должен предоставить постоянное декларативное и судебное предписание, чтобы не допустить введения запрета Трампа-Пенса в действие.

Истцы также подали отдельные ходатайства возражая против ходатайств администрации о прекращении дела и отмене общенационального предварительного запрета вынесено 30 октября 2017 года окружным судьей Коллин Коллар-Котелли Окружного суда США по округу Колумбия.

Подтверждающие заявления, поданные 11 мая 2018 г.:

Заявление Джоша Сейфера, доктор медицины, член Американской коллегии врачей общей практики, президент Американской профессиональной ассоциации по вопросам здоровья трансгендеров (USPATH)

Декларация Джорджа Р. Брауна, доктор медицины, DFAPA

Декларация Брэда Карсона, бывший исполняющий обязанности заместителя министра обороны по кадрам и боеготовности

Декларация Лорен Милгрум, в поддержку Заявления о неоспоримых существенных фактах

Основные аргументы истцов из документов от 11 мая 2018 года:

Запрет Трампа-Пенса на несение военной службы трансгендерам наносит ущерб боевой готовности, нерационально исключая квалифицированных трансгендерных военнослужащих.
«План Мэттиса», принятый администрацией Трампа 23 марта, исключает трансгендерных людей из службы на основании их трансгендерного статуса, а не по каким-либо медицинским показаниям.
«План Мэттиса» — это тот же категорический запрет на службу трансгендеров, о котором президент Трамп написал в Твиттере, несмотря на то, что он якобы предусматривает «исключение» для трансгендеров, служащих в соответствии с их биологическим полом. Точно так же, как политика, требующая от мусульман служить в армии только в случае отказа от своей веры, является запретом на военную службу мусульман, политика, требующая от трансгендеров служить в соответствии с их биологическим полом, является запретом на военную службу трансгендеров. Это также похоже на ранее выдвинутый, но несостоявшийся аргумент, единогласно отвергнутый судами, о том, что законы, ограничивающие брак только парами между мужчиной и женщиной, не дискриминируют геев, поскольку гей может вступить в брак с представителем противоположного пола.
Документы администрации Трампа, полученные в результате расследования, показывают, что процесс, приведший к разработке «Плана Мэттиса», был специально предпринят для разработки политики, соответствующей полному запрету Трампа на услуги трансгендеров. Вместо того чтобы дать веское основание для особого отношения к трансгендерам, план опирается на гендерные стереотипы и огульные обобщения относительно роли и возможностей трансгендеров.
Исключение квалифицированных, годных кандидатов из службы на основе огульных групповых обобщений нерационально. Например, депрессия, тревожность и самоубийства чаще встречаются среди белых, чем среди чернокожих, но армия не запрещает белым служить. Женщины вдвое чаще мужчин страдают тревожными расстройствами, но армия не исключает женщин из службы.
Аргументы ответчиков о сплоченности подразделений сводятся к утверждению, что «трансгендеры одним своим существованием подрывают стандарты, основанные на половой принадлежности». Если бы «этого утверждения было достаточно для оправдания запрета трансгендерам на военную службу, оно также оправдывало бы их исключение из любых учреждений, где действуют критерии отбора по половому признаку, включая школы, рабочие места, общественные места и т.д.», — что суды по всей стране неоднократно отклоняли.

Прямая связь между твитами президента Трампа и «Планом Мэттиса» по реализации запрета

(страница из Заявления Неоспоримые существенные факты)

Подробнее об этом подаче. (далее…)

Блог

Дом » Национальный/Федеральный » Page 42

Donald Trump’s disgraceful tweets this week threatening to ban transgender people from military service have me hopping mad.

How dare he disparage brave men and women who courageously step forward to defend this country?

I want you to know: GLAD will defend transgender service members targeted by this administration for unfair treatment.

We are working right now with our partners at NCLR to explore all legal options and intend to act swiftly. But we need to hear from you now.

If you or someone you know are or could be affected by a change in military policy, contact us today.

We won’t let Trump get away with disrespecting the thousands of transgender people who serve this nation with honor and distinction.

These are rough times. Today, our family and friends in uniform are under attack. Who knows who will be next? But GLAD is in this fight for the long haul.

Together we will resist any attack this administration attempts on our community.