This Lesbian Judge Has Zero Time For Trump’s Anti-Trans BS
In a heated courtroom exchange, Judge Ana Reyes called Trump’s trans military ban exactly what it is: a weak excuse for blatant discrimination.
Donald Trump has long relied on the phrase “common sense” to justify some of his most controversial policies. He’s even called his mass of executive orders, including a ban on transgender troops, a “revolution of common sense,” reducing complex issues to what he perceives as obvious truths. But in a federal court hearing this week, Judge Ana Reyes—an out lesbian and the first LGBTQ+ person to serve as a district court judge in Washington, D.C.—flipped Trump’s favorite argument on its head.
The case in question challenges Trump’s executive order barring transgender people from serving in the military. The order, implemented by Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, halted the enlistment of new trans service members and stripped active-duty personnel of gender-affirming healthcare. Justifying the policy, Trump’s administration claimed that pronoun usage and gender identity accommodations somehow threatened military readiness and effectiveness.
Judge Reyes wasn’t having it.
During a heated exchange with Justice Department attorney Jason Lynch, Reyes zeroed in on the supposed “common sense” rationale behind the ban. “Explain to me how pronoun usage impacts military readiness,” she demanded. “Because it doesn’t. Because any common sense rational human being would understand it doesn’t.”
Lynch, struggling to defend the indefensible, was unable to provide a coherent response. Reyes then took it a step further, issuing a bold challenge: “If you can get me an officer of the United States military to get on the stand and say that because of pronoun usage we are less prepared, I will be the first to buy you a box of cigars.”
This wasn’t just rhetorical flair. Reyes exposed the glaring weakness of Trump’s argument: there is no evidence—none—that the presence of trans service members harms military effectiveness. In fact, a 2016 study by the RAND Corporation found that trans-inclusion has no negative impact on unit cohesion, operational effectiveness, or readiness. Other nations, including the UK, Canada, and Australia, allow trans troops to serve without issue. Reyes’ challenge was a direct call for proof—proof the government simply doesn’t have.
Trump’s executive order, which falsely claims that trans identity is incompatible with military service, echoes his broader pattern of using “common sense” as a smokescreen for discrimination. In this case, Judge Reyes exposed that tactic for what it is: a flimsy pretext for anti-trans hostility.
Related: Trump Signs Executive Order Banning Trans Athletes From Women’s Sports
Beyond the issue of pronouns, Reyes dismantled the language of Trump’s order, which describes trans service members as “dishonorable” and lacking “warrior ethos.” She called out the inherent bigotry in labeling an entire group of Americans as unfit for service. “We are dealing with the president of the United States calling a group of people who have served their country—who, you have told me, have made America safer—calling them liars.”
“This is the policy of the president of the United States that is impacting thousands of people,” she said. “Calling an entire group of people lying, dishonest people with no integrity… how is that anything other than showing animus?”
Reyes stated she will wait to rule on the matter until the Pentagon releases a report next week outlining its plans to revise policies in accordance with Trump’s order.
A follow-up hearing is scheduled for March 3, after the report’s release.
The hearing made one thing clear: the real threat to military readiness isn’t pronoun usage—it’s discrimination. By targeting trans service members, Trump’s policy weakens the military by forcing out qualified, dedicated soldiers for no legitimate reason.
