Alliance responds to US Supreme Court ruling on military transgender ban
January 22, 2019
In July of 2017, the LGBTQIA Alliance of Vermont issued the following in response to the proposed ban on transgender people serving in the military. Today, the US Supreme Court has issued a ruling granting the Department of Justice’s request for a stay on preliminary rulings blocking implementation of a ban, the LGBTQIA Alliance of Vermont again stands in opposition to this action. Per Alliance Liaison Brenda Churchill, “The facts that supported the previous stays have not changed. What has changed is the composition of the US Supreme Court that appears to be more intent upon supporting a conservative political agenda than supporting the rights of all US citizens.”
The LGBTQIA Alliance of Vermont also echoes the statements of trans-identified legal scholar Dean Spade that military inclusion is not the only, or the highest, priority for the transgender community. National issues that include, poverty and criminalization, prison growth and police violence, victimization in criminal systems, and achieving universal parity in healthcare that includes essential services for trans people. To date, only 17 states (34%) and the District of Columbia provide basic non-discrimination protections based upon gender identity.
Statement issued by LGBTQIA Alliance of Vermont in July 2017:
The LGBTQIA Alliance of Vermont stands firmly opposed to this ban. Per Alliance Liaison Brenda Churchill, “The only thing that is of significance when it comes to allowing military personnel to serve is whether they can handle the job for which they are trained and to which they are assigned. By attacking thousands of transgender troops already serving, President Trump makes it clear that he cares more about extreme ideology than military readiness.”
The Alliance echoes, and supports the statements made by former Defense Secretary Ash Carter who ended the transgender military ban just last year, and those of Senator Elizbeth Warren: “To choose service members on other grounds than military qualifications is social policy and has no place in our military.” “There are already transgender individuals who are serving capably and honorably. This action would also send the wrong signal to a younger generation thinking about military service.”
As has been provided by the Human Rights Campaign: According to the Williams Institute, there are an estimated 15,500 actively serving transgender members of the U.S. military. Thousands of transgender people have served with honor and distinction in our military, including the more than 134,00 transgender veterans who are alive today. Transgender service members have risked their lives around the world, and the previous transgender military ban made them unable to be their authentic selves or seek the medical care they needed. This had negative implications for our nation’s military readiness. A service member who is able to be open and honest about their gender identity and receive appropriate care is more productive and focused on the mission.
A 2016 Rand study commissioned by the Defense Department found that the medical costs of trans service members represented an “exceedingly small portion of active-component health care expenditures.” According to the study, which analyzed health insurance data on gender transition-related expenditures, extending medical care to transgender service members would increase costs by $2.4 million to $8.4 million a year. That comes out to be between one-tenth and one-twentieth of a percent.