Civil and Human Rights

RELEASE: CAC: Transgender Ban Violates Constitution, Hurts Military

WASHINGTON – Constitutional Accountability Center today filed an amicus brief in support of plaintiffs in the case of Jane Doe 2 v. Trump, arguing that the Administration’s attempt to ban transgender individuals from military service violates the Constitution’s guarantee that all people enjoy equal protection of the laws.

CAC Chief Counsel Brianne Gorod said, “Let’s be clear: The Trump Administration’s policy boils down to discrimination for discrimination’s sake. Appeals to military readiness, unit cohesion, or good order and discipline as justifications for shutting out transgender individuals who want to put their lives on the line in defense of their country, are the same sham pretexts once used to justify discriminatory treatment of African Americans, women, and gay and lesbian individuals. The Constitution of the United States prohibits such discriminatory treatment. Now that the military is integrated, it is stronger for it.

“President Trump, shooting from the lip as usual, failed to consult with his military advisers before tweeting the announcement of his transgender ban. No wonder. Transgender people were already serving openly in the military with no ill effects, and a study commissioned by the military and released before transgender people were allowed to serve openly concluded that open service would not negatively affect military effectiveness or unit cohesion. In fact, military experts agree that ending discriminatory policies and ensuring diversity in the military’s ranks has actually strengthened the military and its effectiveness.

“Discrimination hurts the military and the Constitution doesn’t allow it. We hope the court of appeals agrees.”

#

Resources:

CAC’s amicus brief in support of Jane Doe in Jane Doe 2 v. Trumphttps://www.theusconstitution.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/CAC-Jane-Doe-2-v-Trump-as-filed.pdf

##

Now in our tenth year, Constitutional Accountability Center is a think tank, public interest law firm, and action center dedicated to fulfilling the progressive promise of the Constitution’s text and history. Visit the new CAC website at www.theusconstitution.org.

###

More from Civil and Human Rights

Civil and Human Rights
January 13, 2025

CAC RELEASE: At Stanley Oral Argument, Questioning Focuses on Narrow Ground for Resolving Employment Discrimination Case in Favor of a Retiree with a Disability

WASHINGTON, DC – Following oral argument at the Supreme Court this morning in Stanley v....
Civil and Human Rights
December 30, 2024

Top Contributor Essays of 2024

The Regulatory Review
The Regulatory Review is pleased to revisit our top regulatory essays of 2024, each authored by...
Civil and Human Rights
December 5, 2024

Podcast (We the People): Can Tennessee Ban Medical Transitions for Transgender Minors?

National Constitution Center
A Tennessee law prohibits transgender minors from receiving gender transition surgery and hormone therapy. Professor Kurt...
Civil and Human Rights
December 4, 2024

RELEASE: Supreme Court Should Not Turn Equal Protection Clause on its Head in Case about Medical Care for Transgender Adolescents

WASHINGTON, DC – Following oral argument at the Supreme Court this morning in United States...
Civil and Human Rights
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Payan v. Los Angeles Community College District

In Payan v. Los Angeles Community College District, the Ninth Circuit is considering whether lost educational opportunities are compensable under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act. 
Civil and Human Rights
U.S. Supreme Court

Stanley v. City of Sanford

In Stanley v. City of Sanford, the Supreme Court is considering whether the Americans with Disabilities Act protects against disability discrimination with respect to retirement benefits distributed after employment.