如果国防部试图限制或禁止跨性别服役人员，一名联邦法官似乎准备阻止特朗普政府。
美国地区法官安娜·雷耶斯(Ana Reyes)周二仍在听取该案的辩论，但对跨性别服役人员降低军队杀伤力或战备状态的说法深表怀疑。
“你和我都同意，世界历史上最伟大的战斗力量不会因为不到1%的士兵使用不同的代词而受到任何影响。你同意吗?”雷耶斯法官在今早的听证会上问道。
“不，法官大人，我不是。我不能同意，”司法部的一名律师回应道。
有争议的是特朗普的1月27日美国总统之行政命令这指示国防部更新其指导“关于为军事服务的跨鉴定医疗标准，并废除与军事准备不一致的指导。”虽然国防部尚未发布关于跨性别服役人员的最终指南，但该命令导致暂停对服役人员的性别确认护理，并预计将导致基于“准备就绪和致命性”的跨性别服役人员的大幅减少。
随着国防部的政策有望在未来一周内最终确定，雷耶斯表示，她将推迟发布命令，但在很大程度上已经对该命令的合法性下定了决心，并一度表示，“华盛顿特区巡回法庭上更聪明的人必须告诉我，我对该政策是错误的”。她补充说，行政命令的中心前提——只有两种性别存在——是“不符合生物学的”
雷耶斯还对行政命令的措辞表示担忧，她批评行政命令故意不精确，是禁止变性士兵的借口。
“如果特朗普总统现在在这里，我对他说，‘这是变性人禁令吗?’你认为他会说什么?”雷耶斯问道。
“我不知道，法官大人，”DOJ律师杰森·林奇说。
“我愿意。他会说，“当然是。”因为他称之为跨性别禁令，因为其中所有的语言都是指示性的，”雷耶斯说。
法官在听证会开始时指出，每一个服役人员，无论其性别意识形态如何，都“值得我们感谢”，他还在听证会上花了一部分时间向林奇提问一群变性士兵谁提起的诉讼。
“如果你在散兵坑里，你不会在意这些个体的性别意识形态，对吗?你会很高兴有人有这样的经历和勇气，并且为国家做出了光荣的贡献，他就坐在你身边。对吗?”雷耶斯问道。
“我不想作为证人作证，法官大人，也不想提供我个人对假设的看法，”林奇在承认之前回应道，“如果我在散兵坑里，我怀疑性别身份会是首要问题。”
雷耶斯还敦促司法部的律师——她后来称赞他为自己的案件辩护——承认变性士兵使国家“更安全”。
"他们是可敬的、诚实的、守纪律的吗?"雷耶斯问道。“据我所知，他们中，有超过60年的军龄。”
“没错，”林奇说道。
"你同意原告们一起让美国变得更安全了吗?"雷耶斯问道。
“我同意，是的，”林奇说。
'Unadulterated animus': Judge blasts DOJ about transgender military restrictions
A federal judge appears poised to block the Trump administration if the Department of Defense attempts to place limitations on or ban transgender service members.
U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes is still hearing arguments Tuesday in the case but signaled deep skepticism with the claim that transgender service members lessen the military’s lethality or readiness.
“You and I both agree that the greatest fighting force that world history has ever seen is not going to be impacted in any way by less than 1% of the soldiers using a different pronoun than others might want to call them. Would you agree with that?” Judge Reyes asked during a hearing this morning.
“No, Your Honor, I'm not. I can't agree with that,” a lawyer for the Department of Justice responded.
At issue is Trump’s Jan. 27executive orderthat directed the DOD to update its guidance "regarding trans-identifying medical standards for military service and to rescind guidance inconsistent with military readiness." While the Department of Defense has not issued final guidance on transgender service members, the order led to a pause in gender affirming care for service members and is expected to lead to a significant curtailment of transgender service members based on “readiness and lethality."
With the DOD policy expected to be finalized over the coming week, Reyes said she would hold off on issuing an order but had largely made up her mind about the legality of the order, at one point remarking that “smarter people on the D.C. Circuit would have to tell me I’m wrong” about the policy. She added that the central premise of the executive order -- that only two genders exist -- is “not biologically correct.”
Reyes also raised concerns about the wording of the executive order, which she criticized for being intentionally imprecise and a pretext for a ban on transgender soldiers.
“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?” Reyes asked.
“I have no idea, Your Honor,” said DOJ attorney Jason Lynch.
“I do. He would say, 'Of course it is.' Because he calls it a transgender ban, because all the language in it is indicative,” Reyes said.
The judge -- who began the hearing by noting that every service member regardless of their gender ideology “deserves our gratitude” -- also spent a portion of the hearing questioning Lynch about thegroup of transgender soldierswho filed the lawsuit.
“If you were in a foxhole, you wouldn't care about these individuals' gender ideology, right? You would just be happy that someone with that experience and that bravery and that honorable service to the country was sitting right next to you. Right?” Reyes asked.
“Don't want to testify as a witness, Your Honor, or offer my personal views of hypothetical,” Lynch responded before conceding, “If I were in a foxhole, I doubt that the gender identity would be a primary concern.”
Reyes also pushed the lawyer for the Department of Justice -- who she later commended for arguing his case well -- to admit that the transgender soldiers made the country “safer.”
“Are they honorable, truthful, and disciplined?" Reyes asked. "As far as I know, among them, they have over 60 years of military service.”
“That's correct,” Lynch said.
“And you would agree that together, the plaintiffs have made America safer?” Reyes asked.
“I would agree, yes,” Lynch said.
