In the briefs filed yesterday, US solicitor general Noel Francisco explained that the dispute requires the justices' immediate attention because the "prior policy" of allowing transgender individuals to serve "posed too great a risk to military effectiveness and lethality": The government can't afford to keep the old policy in place for a year while it waits for the courts of appeals to issue their rulings and then appeals to the Supreme Court.
The Pentagon changed its policy regarding transgender people in 2016, under then-President Barack Obama, allowing them serve openly in the military.
Transgender individuals had never been able to serve in the us military, but Barack Obama attempted to change that policy shortly during his final term, and President Trump inherited that attempted policy change shortly after taking office.
It defined such individuals as "those who may require substantial medical treatment, including through medical drugs or surgery".
On July 26, 2017, President Trump settled the debate by announcing that the US military would not include transgender individuals. "And absent this court's prompt intervention, it is unlikely that the military will be able to implement its new policy any time soon". Trump's recent salvo against the "Obama judge" who ruled against his asylum policy - not one of the issues now before the Supreme Court - prompted Chief Justice John Roberts to fire back at the president for the first time for feeding perceptions of a biased judiciary.
Evolution, not revolution, for new Range Rover Evoque
Full local pricing and specifications will be announced closer to the new Evoque's local arrival in the second quarter of 2019. The Evoque can also wade through water up to 600mm deep, which is 100mm more from the first-generation model.
The Supreme Court does not ordinarily intercede until at least one appeals court has considered an issue, and it typically awaits a disagreement among appeals courts before adding a case to its docket.
It is rare to ask the Supreme Court to hear a case before a federal appeals court has had an opportunity to weigh in.
"There is absolutely no support for the claim that the ongoing service of transgender people would have any negative effect on the military at all".
"The President's ban is a cruel and arbitrary decision created to humiliate transgender Americans who have stepped forward to serve our country", she said in a statement.
The administration has since limited the policy to transgender individuals with a history of gender dysphoria. Several lawsuits were filed, with lower courts all ruling against the Trump administration.
The US government is appealing those decisions. Six months later, Defense Secretary James Mattis proposed a modified policy, ultimately approved by the president, that would allow transgender individuals to serve, but only if they did not seek gender transition and agreed to serve "in their biological sex". The District of Columbia federal court likewise refused to lift its identical injunction on August 6 and the Central District of California did the same on September 18.