It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

US military to accept transgender recruits after courts block Donald Trump’s ban

page: 1
9
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 30 2017 @ 05:26 AM
link   

The US president announced in July that he planned to block the Obama-era policy of accepting transgender people into the military.

But the government has accepted defeat after federal appeals courts in Washington and Virginia ruled against the president, who will not challenge them.
metro.co.uk...


I'm always interested to see how Trumpers try to turn everything Trump does into "winning." Here's my guess as to how they'll spin this:

"Trump's order was overturned. Time to clean house in the deep state. Trump is just making the traitors expose themselves. #MAGA"

Alright Trumpists, Trump's been in power for a year. Time is running out. You've most likely got three years left.

You can't keep making promises forever.




posted on Dec, 30 2017 @ 05:28 AM
link   
Thilly tholdierths !
edit on 30/12/2017 by scubagravy because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 30 2017 @ 05:30 AM
link   
from your article:

They said: ‘The Department of Defense has announced that it will be releasing an independent study of these issues in the coming weeks. ‘So rather than litigate this interim appeal before that occurs, the administration has decided to wait for DoD’s study and will continue to defend the president’s lawful authority in District Court in the meantime.’

Announcing his ban, Trump said the military ‘cannot be burdened with the tremendous medical costs and disruption that transgender in the military would entail’. In September, the Pentagon created a panel made up of senior officials studying how to implement Trump’s plan forbidding transgender soldiers from serving.


Just like the travel ban, another case of liberals wearing robes legislating from the bench.

What was the outcome of the travel ban case?
edit on 30-12-2017 by EvidenceNibbler because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 30 2017 @ 05:32 AM
link   
a reply to: antiantonym

When was the last time a President's Executive Orders led to "confusion?" Just about every Trump decree leads to puzzlement, conflict, and lawsuits. I can't remember that happening with any President since FDR.



posted on Dec, 30 2017 @ 05:37 AM
link   
a reply to: antiantonym

Cool send them to the front lines,they can be the expendables the socialist's are creating,they want to be a soldier then let them be one,they should get no special privelidges



posted on Dec, 30 2017 @ 05:45 AM
link   
a reply to: EvidenceNibbler


What was the outcome of the travel ban case?


The order had to be re-written to clarify what is expected. It is still not clear what vetting standards need to be put into place. Oh, and now that we have a "conservative" appointing judges, we can look forward to Jim Crow coming back.



posted on Dec, 30 2017 @ 05:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: Oldtimer2
a reply to: antiantonym

Cool send them to the front lines,they can be the expendables the socialist's are creating,they want to be a soldier then let them be one,they should get no special privelidges


That is all they are asking for. Saying that makes you a liberal. Welcome!



posted on Dec, 30 2017 @ 05:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: EvidenceNibbler


What was the outcome of the travel ban case?


The order had to be re-written to clarify what is expected. It is still not clear what vetting standards need to be put into place. Oh, and now that we have a "conservative" appointing judges, we can look forward to Jim Crow coming back.


Did the order have to make it's way to SCOTUS, and if so what was their ruling?
Did the President have the authority to limit immigration?



posted on Dec, 30 2017 @ 06:08 AM
link   
a reply to: Oldtimer2

Hear hear, fellow liberal!
If only more people thought like that in our administration. Except for making them expendable, I guess, though they do have to put their lives on the line. Thank you, American soldier.



posted on Dec, 30 2017 @ 06:08 AM
link   
a reply to: EvidenceNibbler


Did the order have to make it's way to SCOTUS, and if so what was their ruling?


Even the activist jurors on the Supreme Court insisted the EO had to be fixed. It now only applies to those without ties to the US. In other words, it was too broad and badly written. The word "confusion" pops into mind again.


Did the President have the authority to limit immigration?


Based on precedent, not the Constitution. Congress can change that is they want.


+8 more 
posted on Dec, 30 2017 @ 06:22 AM
link   
I don’t see why the military has to accept [snip]. They don’t accept tall people or people with flat feet and you don’t see courts overturning people with those types of deviations. The military should have the right to deny entry to anyone that has an anomalous condition.
edit on 2017/12/30 by Metallicus because: Sp

edit on Sat Dec 30 2017 by DontTreadOnMe because: The END of Hate Speech, subtle or otherwise, on ATS



posted on Dec, 30 2017 @ 06:35 AM
link   
a reply to: antiantonym

Not that big of an issue.
People can be disqualified for any number of reasons when going through initial screening.

Even then, they would have to make it through boot camp... A person can only push, run, push run so many times before they get stress fractures.



posted on Dec, 30 2017 @ 06:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: Metallicus
I don’t see why the military has to accept trannies. They don’t accept tall people or people with flat feet and you don’t see courts overturning people with those types of deviations. The military should have the right to deny entry to anyone that has an anomalous condition.


The president as comander in chief granted in the constitution article 2 he can set policy for the armed forces. Court has to over rule rights granted in the constitution which they can't do without congress amending the constitution. Bottom line if he can show this harms the armed forces then the ban would stand. Courts are trying to look at the rights of individuals but no one has a right to join the military. I don't see the harm in this case but I would be interested in seeing the study the armed forces are doing before making a final decision.



posted on Dec, 30 2017 @ 06:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001

originally posted by: Oldtimer2
a reply to: antiantonym

Cool send them to the front lines,they can be the expendables the socialist's are creating,they want to be a soldier then let them be one,they should get no special privelidges


That is all they are asking for. Saying that makes you a liberal. Welcome!


Well, no. Not really.
They are asking for much more, including the financing of sex change operations.
If all they want to do is fight and be treated exactly the same as any other man, then great.



posted on Dec, 30 2017 @ 06:56 AM
link   
a reply to: dragonridr


I don't see the harm in this case

Hold my rifle while I dilate my artificial vagina so it doesn't scab over and close off comes to mind.



posted on Dec, 30 2017 @ 06:59 AM
link   
a reply to: antiantonym

Unlike the mindless leftists who only believe what their party masters tell them, many of us "Trump supporters" were against the president on this issue.

If people are able to serve and want to serve, then they should be given the opportunity to serve.



posted on Dec, 30 2017 @ 07:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: antiantonym

Unlike the mindless leftists who only believe what their party masters tell them, many of us "Trump supporters" were against the president on this issue.

If people are able to serve and want to serve, then they should be given the opportunity to serve.


Only if they are treated exactly the same as the next guy they are serving with, but yeah, if so then I can't see a problem.
edit on 30/12/2017 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 30 2017 @ 07:01 AM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

Absolutely.



posted on Dec, 30 2017 @ 07:06 AM
link   
Can they do the job? If the answer is yes so flipping what.
You should be thanking these folk for willing to put their lives on the line.
edit on 30-12-2017 by testingtesting because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 30 2017 @ 07:06 AM
link   
a reply to: EvidenceNibbler

The travel ban that was supposed to be for ninety days until they could put their extreme vetting process into place? Why haven't they got that vetting process in place yet? It's been a hell of a lot longer than ninety days already.

But...He can't even do this much right. Pathetic ...

He wants to ban Muslims from his white male Christian ( What a joke that is) country.
Trouble is he'd never even considered god before getting elected. Only brown skin. He hates brown skin. He loves him some orange skin though doesn't he???




top topics



 
9
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join