Cianna Hope Reeves
The Blue & White Flash / Managing Editor
Transgender military personnel are now in the crossfire after a ruling prevents them to be in combat for their country.
In a 5-4 decision revealed Tuesday, Jan.22, Supreme Court Justices declared that persons who have undergone gender transition through surgical procedures are no longer allowed to fight.
This verdict is a win for President Donald Trump, who wanted to enforce the change he says due to the liability of outnumbering medical fees and distraction. According to the National Center for Transgender Equality, over 15,000 transgender persons serve in the U.S. military.
“The United States Government will not allow or accept transgender individuals to serve in any capacity in the U.S. Military. Our military must be focused on decisive and overwhelming victory and cannot be burdened with the tremendous medical costs and disruption that transgender in the military would entail,” declared Trump in a 2017 tweet.
Prior to the president’s appeal, the Obama Administration was a known advocate for providing medical benefits to those who have gender dysphoria and ruled that transgenders could serve openly.
Gender Dysphoria is a state where one believes their emotional and psychological identity as male or female to be the opposite to their biological sex; this condition is recognized in nearly 8,980 active duty transgender soldiers today, according to Department of Defense data discovered by the Palm Center.
This debated policy was not new to the courts; immediately after Trump’s controversial announcement, lower-court judges began to go against the claim which then resulted in former Defense Secretary Jim Mattis to later reinvent it, this time changing the law to detailed limitations on who could serve.
According to a Pentagon document regarding the issue, transgenders with a history of gender dysphoria are disqualified from military serviceIn an effort to eradicate allegations that the rule completely bans transgender troops and that they will receive proper treatment, the Pentagon released a statement following the Supreme Court decision.
“The Department of Defense’s proposed policy is based on professional judgement and will ensure that the U.S. armed forces remain the most lethal and combat-effective fighting force in the world,” said Air Force Lt. Col. Carla Gleason.
While these restrictions may be considered strategic methods to cut back spending funds on medical-related issues for transgender soldiers—specifically in active duty—many democrats, citizens, and LGBTQ activists opposed the rule referring to it as irrational and unfair.
In a poll by The Economist and YouGov, 49 percent of Americans believed transgenders should have the ability to join and fight in the U.S. Military.
After hearing the news, Charlotte Clymer, who is a transgender military veteran, bashed the administration and the highest court of the land via Twitter, stating the policy is “hateful” and “cowardly”.
One JSU student also agreed with those who opposed the new procedure and called it neglectful and a matter of disrespect for current and aspiring transgender soldiers.
“The policy is unjust because anyone that wants to serve in the military should be allowed regardless of sexual orientation. If they are capable of fulfilling a job most people would not dare to commit to, by all means they should have the right,” declared Markiea Brown, a senior history major from Rosedale, Miss.
He continued, “The judgement is just based on conservative beliefs. I say that because if the government truly wanted to supply their needs, they could; however, it is not on their agenda to do so.”
