Since the 2016 decision under the Obama administration, which allowed transgender citizens to serve in the military, approximately 9,000 individuals who identify as transgender have volunteered to join the Armed Services, according to CNN. However, President Trump has attempted to halt and overturn this decision since the beginning of his term in 2017. In a recent SCOTUS decision, the Court came to a 5-4 decision which overturned the policy enacted during the Obama administration, thus preventing transgender citizens from enlisting in the U.S. Armed Services.
Even in an era following Obergefell v. Hodges (SCOTUS decision which upheld gay marriage) and an increasing prominence and support for the entirety of the LGBTQ+ community, it shocks me that the current administration is preventing certain groups of people for volunteering to serve for our country. In order to serve in the military, one must possess immense strength and honor for the country, and I believe that the Supreme Court's decision invalidates and overlooks the great sacrifice these citizens are making by enlisting.
The topic of civil rights for minority groups is a highly contested issue throughout the nation, and this recent decision serves as yet another example of the great polarization present in the United States today.
Questions:
1. In the case of a draft, do you believe that the Trump administration and/or the Supreme Court would uphold their current position on the issue of transgender enlistment? Why or why not?
2. The 5-4 decision was split according to party affiliation, as all 5 conservative justices supported the ban of transgender enlistment. How do you believe this divided Court will impact future rulings? Should the validity of 5-4 rulings be re-evaluated in the event of such polarization we face today?
In the case of a draft I don't think the administration would reverse its decision. The usual underlying reasons behind gender favoritism in the military (unit cohesion, morale, etc.) apply the same, I would assume, to transgender persons as they do to women. If women were to remain barred from the draft, which I think they would, the eligibility for transgenders would remain the same as well. It may also be that their reasons for striking down the act were perhaps related to something other than just not liking certain minorities. There is no opinion summary included in this post, so I'm not sure. It may be that the justices support transgender service, but wording or implications of the law or the manner in which it integrated the armed forces were not constitutional. The impact of the new court will be a slough of conservative decisions. The validity of such decisions should not be questioned. 5-4 decisions are not exceedingly rare, they have happened before, and often along partisan lines. It is an inherent part of the court that has been around for a while. As long as there are 9 justices, there will be some decisions based on a partisan split. Just because one may not agree with an outcome does not mean the process must be changed; soon conservatives may be asking the same questions of a predominantly liberal court. The answer will still be no.
ReplyDeleteI doubt that the Trump administration will overturn their decision to ban transgenders from the military because they are able to justify themselves. A common concern for transgenders serving in the military is the possibility that federal funds will be used to cover their medical bills related to treatment of gender dysphoria. This allows people who support the transgender military ban to appear as though they aren't acting out of prejudice. It is possible that the ban will be overturned when the government falls under Democratic control, and that the Supreme Court will be asked again to review the law.
ReplyDeleteI do not think the current Trump administration will be able to uphold their stance on whether or not transgender people should be allowed to enlist in the military. With the spreading awareness of equal rights to all people and supreme court cases such as Obergefell v Hodges, it is clear that there are group making an effort to rid of inequality. I believe that Trump's justifications will be suffice in order to combat the will of the groups who want to overturn his decision. Since America today is very split, it is not a surprise that the court ruling is completely divided based on political ideology affiliation. This divided court will undoubtedly affect future ruling because political polarization only strengthens each side.
ReplyDeleteIn the case of a draft, there is already a mandatory draft sign up for all males when they turn 18. This doesn't include women and has moved the issue into the broader gender rights issue. I believe that transgender people should have the right to serve in the military, because serving in such a position would place their life in danger at the protection of the nation. I respect anyone who is willing to serve in the military and I don't agree with Trump's ban since it would impede many citizens of their aspirations to join the military. Polarization in the Supreme Court should be reviewed as the Founders clearly wanted the institution to be as nonpartisan as possible. In this era, it is difficult to escape the clutches of such bipartisan politics.
ReplyDeleteIn this case, I highly doubt that the Trump administration and the Supreme Court will change/reverse their decision in any way. The United States military actually gets to decide whether or not to adopt this policy despite the Court allowing it, and I sincerely hope they reconsider. If one is to serve in the military, they may not be on any medication- which is a rule that's been upheld since the start of our military- so I'm not sure how that affects those who identify as transgender who take hormonal medication, but I still believe that anyone who wishes to serve our country should be able to. It's unfortunate that our current administration has this type of hate and continues to focus on it, despite much larger issues that we should be focusing on. After the Obama Administration's decision, there are approx. 15,000 people who identify as transgender in our military, and now we are putting them at risk of discharge for being honest and being themselves? What if this rule is reversed again by our next president? Seems completely ridiculous to me. In the future, regarding the 5-4 split decision, I think that it will honestly depend on the cases in the future. Hopefully a majority republican court wont necessarily mean majority republican decisions and the justices can leave their personal bias out of their decisions.
ReplyDeleteAt first when I heard about this court case decision, I was simply and utterly confused. I didn't understand how this could benefit anyone to prevent willing and able people from serving in the military. However, after looking into the topic more, I learned about how the military does not want people who have done intensive surgeries or take any kind of regular medication to be serving. Many transgender people do take hormonal medications, which helped me understand the decision a bit more. Nevertheless, I still think that anyone and everyone should have the right to join the military as long as they are deemed fit and capable of serving. At least though they should be able to participate in some manner. Especially in regards to the draft because if there are not enough people to serve they need people to serve, so transgender people should have the right to do so.
ReplyDeleteIn today’s political climate, I think that it is highly unlikely that the Trump administration were to overturn or reconsider its ruling. At this point, the conservative court along with Trump’s administration is desperately trying to influence public conflicts, often hindering or restricting backlash to more progressive policies. Although this results in very close decisions most often drawn along party lines, a 5-4 decision is considered a major win for conservatives Justices of the court as well as millions of more conservative citizens throughout the country. However, I think that the transgender ban is simply disrespectful. If people are brave and passionate enough to join the army, their efforts should be applauded instead of rejected because of their gender identification. Although previous norms such “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” were terminated and seemed to make the military more inclusive and acceptive, the transgender ban will reinforce the rigid gender norms imposed on that sector of the government.
ReplyDeleteI am also frustrated by the fact that there is discrimination against transgender people in the military. I do not understand how this can still exist when there is a clear distinction in the 14th amendment that clearly states that all rights are protected and I believe that serving in the military is a right, although not explicitly stated in the constitution. There is nothing disabling about being transgender and every human has health costs that the military should be willing to pay for if the individual is willing to sacrifice their lives for their country.
ReplyDeleteIn the case of a draft I do not think the current administration will overturn its ban on transgender people in the military due to ego and pride. I think future rulings will lean more conservative because of the majority conservative justices on the bench. And because the Court is so distinctly split I think it is acceptable for people to be morally skeptical of the decisions made; however, I don't think people should doubt the validity of the ruling. The Court has swung between liberal and conservative leaning and will continue to change, just because the values of the current justices do not reflect liberals doesn't mean they are invalid. They are valid because they reflect a group of the population and the government structure is malleable to change these policies when a new group comes to power. The extreme polarization of society should be no reason we trash an institution that doesn't reflect what we think at that time.
ReplyDelete