Politics
Column: Trump's latest cruel attempt to ban transgender troops won't survive without a fight
The Trump administration‘s policies are built on a foundation of lies: Millions of foreign criminals and mentally ill people illegally stream across our borders. Doctors abort babies after they are born. Tariffs won’t drive up costs for American consumers. American taxpayers buy condoms for Hamas. Transgender service members undermine the armed forces.
Based on that last fiction, the Defense Department announced a ban on transgender troops Wednesday, following an executive order issued by President Trump in January.
“It directs the military to identify any service members who are transgender and then directs that all those will be put in separation proceedings,” said Jennifer Levi, senior counsel with GLAD Law, which along with the National Center for Lesbian Rights is suing to block the policy on behalf of six transgender service members. The plaintiffs say the policy violates the Constitution’s equal protection guarantees.
Although some have read the ban as making some exceptions, Levi said it does not.
“It specifically says that everyone in service has to serve in their birth sex,” she said. “You cannot be transgender in the military.”
Tell that to Sgt. 1st Class Kate Cole, a transgender woman who enlisted at 17 and has spent her entire adult life in the Army. Now 34, Cole, who is one of the plaintiffs asking the courts to stop enforcement of the transgender ban, has earned numerous medals for acts of heroism and meritorious service.
A marksman, she has been deployed to the mountains of eastern Afghanistan, the Baltic states and South Korea. Through it all, even during her transition, she never missed a day of training.
“We’re here, we’re serving honorably, we meet the standards and we just want to continue to serve,” she told me.
Cole said she had planned to leave the Army to transition at one point but decided to stay after reading in the Army Times that the military would study whether transgender troops could serve effectively. On the strength of that study‘s finding that transgender service members had no adverse impact on the military’s mission, then-Defense Secretary Ash Carter rescinded a ban on transgender troops in 2016.
“Although relatively few in number, we’re talking about talented and trained Americans who are serving their country with honor and distinction,” Carter said. “We invest hundreds of thousands of dollars to train and develop each individual, and we want to take the opportunity to retain people whose talent we’ve invested in and who have proven themselves.”
Since then, however, transgender service members have been treated like pingpong balls in a particularly cruel political game. Trump tried to ban them soon after he first took office in 2017. Lawsuits tied up his policy in various courts until President Biden took office in 2021 and reversed course.
And now here we are again. Trump is back in office, and his administration, led by the feckless billionaire Elon Musk, appears hell-bent on inflicting as much misery as possible as it merrily guts the federal government.
Trump’s rationale for the ban is as misbegotten and insulting as his edict that there are only two sexes.
“Beyond the hormonal and surgical medical interventions involved,” Trump wrote in his executive order, “adoption of a gender identity inconsistent with an individual’s sex conflicts with a soldier’s commitment to an honorable, truthful, and disciplined lifestyle. … A man’s assertion that he is a woman, and his requirement that others honor this falsehood, is not consistent with the humility and selflessness required of a service member.”
U.S. District Court Judge Ana Reyes, a Biden appointee in Washington, D.C., was not having it.
“To call an entire group of people lying, dishonest people who are undisciplined, immodest and have no integrity — how is that anything other than showing animus?” she asked a Justice Department lawyer during a recent hearing. (The Supreme Court has ruled repeatedly that laws based solely on animus — bias, dislike or disfavor of people simply because of who they are — do not pass constitutional muster.)
Reyes is expected to rule after a hearing scheduled for March 12. A second, similar request to stop the anti-trans policy was filed on behalf of seven other service members by LAMBDA Legal in Seattle. Multiple legal challenges to policies like this are not unusual; the issue is likely to end up before the Supreme Court.
No one knows for certain how many transgender individuals are serving. A 2014 study by UCLA’s Williams Institute put the number of transgender people on active duty or in the National Guard or reserve forces at around 15,000. A 2016 Rand study commissioned by the Defense Department estimated that about 1,300 to 6,600 transgender service members were on active duty, with about 800 to 4,200 in the reserves. At least 18 countries, including Germany, the United Kingdom, France, Spain, Canada and Australia, allow transgender people to serve openly.
Whatever the actual number here in the United States, it is vanishingly small considering that the overall force comprises some two million troops.
“You and I both agree that the greatest fighting force that world history has ever seen is not going to be impacted in any way by less than 1 percent of the soldiers using a different pronoun than others might want to call them. Would you agree to that?” Judge Reyes asked Justice Department lawyer Jason Lynch.
“No, your honor,” Lynch replied. “I can’t agree with that.”
Sgt. Cole, who paid for her own transition, is currently stationed in Los Angeles, teaching tactics and leadership to ROTC students at UCLA, preparing them to become junior lieutenants. She hopes to retire in 2027 and move to Colorado to work as a climbing guide.
If she is kicked out of the Army before completing her 20 years of service, she stands to lose her $3,500 monthly pension. Thanks for your service, Sgt. Cole!
She does not generally discuss her gender identity or her role in the lawsuit, and even some of her friends have no idea she is trans.
“I’m proud of my service, and ultimately, I just want to continue to do my job,” Cole said. “I don’t want to be a symbol. I just want to do my job and exist.”
That is so little to ask. Doesn’t this country owe her that much?
Bluesky: @rabcarian.bsky.social. Threads: @rabcarian
Politics
Wyoming Supreme Court rules laws restricting abortion violate state constitution
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
The Wyoming Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday that a pair of laws restricting abortion access violate the state constitution, including the country’s first explicit ban on abortion pills.
The court, in a 4-1 ruling, sided with the state’s only abortion clinic and others who had sued over the abortion bans passed since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022, which returned the power to make laws on abortion back to the states.
Despite Wyoming being one of the most conservative states, the ruling handed down by justices who were all appointed by Republican governors upheld every previous lower court ruling that the abortion bans violated the state constitution.
Wellspring Health Access in Casper, the abortion access advocacy group Chelsea’s Fund and four women, including two obstetricians, argued that the laws violated a state constitutional amendment affirming that competent adults have the right to make their own health care decisions.
TRUMP URGES GOP TO BE ‘FLEXIBLE’ ON HYDE AMENDMENT, IGNITING BACKLASH FROM PRO-LIFE ALLIES
The Wyoming Supreme Court ruled that a pair of laws restricting abortion access violate the state constitution. (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)
Voters approved the constitutional amendment in 2012 in response to the federal Affordable Care Act, which is also known as Obamacare.
The justices in Wyoming found that the amendment was not written to apply to abortion but noted that it is not their job to “add words” to the state constitution.
“But lawmakers could ask Wyoming voters to consider a constitutional amendment that would more clearly address this issue,” the justices wrote.
Wellspring Health Access President Julie Burkhart said in a statement that the ruling upholds abortion as “essential health care” that should not be met with government interference.
“Our clinic will remain open and ready to provide compassionate reproductive health care, including abortions, and our patients in Wyoming will be able to obtain this care without having to travel out of state,” Burkhart said.
Wellspring Health Access opened as the only clinic in the state to offer surgical abortions in 2023, a year after a firebombing stopped construction and delayed its opening. A woman is serving a five-year prison sentence after she admitted to breaking in and lighting gasoline that she poured over the clinic floors.
Wellspring Health Access opened as the only clinic in the state to offer surgical abortions in 2023, a year after a firebombing stopped construction. (AP)
Attorneys representing the state had argued that abortion cannot violate the Wyoming constitution because it is not a form of health care.
Republican Gov. Mark Gordon expressed disappointment in the ruling and called on state lawmakers meeting later this winter to pass a constitutional amendment prohibiting abortion that residents could vote on this fall.
An amendment like that would require a two-thirds vote to be introduced as a nonbudget matter in the monthlong legislative session that will primarily address the state budget, although it would have significant support in the Republican-dominated legislature.
“This ruling may settle, for now, a legal question, but it does not settle the moral one, nor does it reflect where many Wyoming citizens stand, including myself. It is time for this issue to go before the people for a vote,” Gordon said in a statement.
APPEALS COURT SIDES WITH TRUMP ON BUDGET PROVISION CUTTING PLANNED PARENTHOOD FUNDS
Gov. Mark Gordon expressed disappointment in the ruling. (Getty Images)
One of the laws overturned by the state’s high court attempted to ban abortion, but with exceptions in cases where it is needed to protect a pregnant woman’s life or in cases of rape or incest. The other law would have made Wyoming the only state to explicitly ban abortion pills, although other states have implemented de facto bans on abortion medication by broadly restricting abortion.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Abortion has remained legal in the state since Teton County District Judge Melissa Owens blocked the bans while the lawsuit challenging the restrictions moved forward. Owens struck down the laws as unconstitutional in 2024.
Last year, Wyoming passed additional laws requiring abortion clinics to be licensed surgical centers and women to receive ultrasounds before having medication abortions. A judge in a separate lawsuit blocked those laws from taking effect while that case moves forward.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Politics
What Trump’s vow to withhold federal child-care funding means in California
SACRAMENTO — Gov. Gavin Newsom and other state Democratic leaders accused President Trump of unleashing a political vendetta after he announced plans to freeze roughly $10 billion in federal funding for child care and social services programs in California and four other Democrat-controlled states.
Trump justified the action in comments posted on his social media platform Truth Social, where he accused Newsom of widespread fraud. The governor’s office dismissed the accusation as “deranged.”
Trump’s announcement came amid a broader administration push to target Democratic-led states over alleged fraud in taxpayer-funded programs, following sweeping prosecutions in Minnesota. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services confirmed the planned funding freeze, which was first reported by the New York Post.
California officials said they have received no formal notice and argued the president is using unsubstantiated claims to justify a move that could jeopardize child care and social services for low-income families.
How we got here
Trump posted on his social media site Truth Social on Tuesday that under Newsom, California is “more corrupt than Minnesota, if that’s possible???” In the post, Trump used a derogatory nickname for Newsom that has become popular with the governor’s critics, referring to him as “Newscum.”
“The Fraud Investigation of California has begun,” Trump wrote.
The president also retweeted a story by the New York Post that said his Department of Health and Human Services will freeze taxpayer funding from the Child Care Development Fund, the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program, which is known as CalWORKS in California, and the Social Services Block Grant program. Health and Human Services said the affected states are California, Colorado, Illinois, Minnesota and New York.
“For too long, Democrat-led states and Governors have been complicit in allowing massive amounts of fraud to occur under their watch,” said Andrew Nixon, a department spokesperson. “Under the Trump Administration, we are ensuring that federal taxpayer dollars are being used for legitimate purposes. We will ensure these states are following the law and protecting hard-earned taxpayer money.”
The department announced last month that all 50 states will have to provide additional levels of verification and administrative data before they receive more funding from the Child Care and Development Fund after a series of fraud schemes at Minnesota day-care centers run by Somali residents.
“The Trump Administration is using the moral guise of eliminating ‘fraud and abuse’ to undermine essential programs and punish families and children who depend on these services to survive, many of whom have no other options if this funding disappears,” Kristin McGuire, president of Young Invincibles, a young-adult nonprofit economic advocacy group, said in a statement. “This is yet another ideologically motivated attack on states that treats millions of families as pawns in a political game.”
California pushes back
Newsom’s office brushed off Trump’s post about fraud allegations, calling the president “a deranged, habitual liar whose relationship with reality ended years ago.” Newsom himself said he welcomes federal fraud investigations in the state, adding in an interview on MS NOW that aired Monday night: “Bring it on. … If he has some unique insight and information, I look forward to partnering with him. I can’t stand fraud.”
However, Newsom said cutting off funding hurts hardworking families who rely on the assistance.
“You want to support families? You believe in families? Then you believe in supporting child care and child-care workers in the workforce,” Newsom told MS NOW.
California has not been notified of any changes to federal child-care or social services funding. H.D. Palmer, a spokesperson for the Department of Finance, said the only indication from Washington that California’s child-care funding could be in jeopardy was the vague 5 a.m. post Tuesday by the president on Truth Social.
“The president tosses these social media missives in the same way Mardi Gras revelers throw beads on Bourbon Street — with zero regard for accuracy or precision,” Palmer said.
In the current state budget, Palmer said, California’s child-care spending is $7.3 billion, of which $2.2 billion is federal dollars. Newsom is set to unveil his budget proposal Friday for the fiscal year that begins July 1, which will mark the governor’s final spending plan before he terms out. Newsom has acknowledged that he is considering a 2028 bid for president, but has repeatedly brushed aside reporters’ questions about it, saying his focus remains on governing California.
Palmer said while details about the potential threat to federal child-care dollars remain unclear, what is known is that federal dollars are not like “a spigot that will be turned off by the end of the week.”
“There is no immediate cutoff that will happen,” Palmer said.
Since Trump took office, California has filed dozens of legal actions to block the president’s policy changes and funding cuts, and the state has prevailed in many of them.
What happened in Minnesota
Federal prosecutors say Minnesota has been hit by some of the largest fraud schemes involving state-run, federally funded programs in the country. Federal prosecutors estimate that as much as half of roughly $18 billion paid to 14 Minnesota programs since 2018 may be fraudulent, with providers accused of billing for services never delivered and diverting money for personal use.
The scale of the fraud has drawn national attention and fueled the Trump administration’s decision to freeze child-care funds while demanding additional safeguards before doling out money, moves that critics say risk harming families who rely on the programs. Gov. Tim Walz has ordered a third-party audit and appointed a director of program integrity. Amid the fallout, Walz announced he will not seek a third term.
Outrage over the fraud reached a fever pitch in the White House after a video posted online by an influencer purported to expose extensive fraud at Somali-run child-care centers in Minnesota. On Monday, that influencer, Nick Shirley, posted on the social media site X, “I ENDED TIM WALZ,” a claim that prompted calls from conservative activists to shift scrutiny to Newsom and California next.
Right-wing podcaster Benny Johnson posted on X that his team will be traveling to California next week to show “how criminal California fraud is robbing our nation blind.”
California officials have acknowledged fraud failures in the past, most notably at the Employment Development Department during the COVID-19 pandemic, when weakened safeguards led to billions of dollars in unemployment payments later deemed potentially fraudulent.
An independent state audit released last month found administrative vulnerabilities in some of California’s social services programs but stopped short of alleging widespread fraud or corruption. The California state auditor added the Department of Social Services to its high-risk list because of persistent errors in calculating CalFresh benefits, which provides food assistance to those in need — a measure of payment accuracy rather than criminal activity — warning that federal law changes could eventually force the state to absorb billions of dollars in additional costs if those errors are not reduced.
What’s at stake in California
The Trump administration’s plans to freeze federal child-care, welfare and social services funding would affect $7.3 billion in Temporary Assistance for Needy Families funding, $2.4 billion for child-care subsidies and more than $800 million for social services programs in the five states.
The move was quickly criticized as politically motivated because the targeted states were all Democrat-led.
“Trump is now illegally freezing childcare and other funding for working families, but only in blue states,” state Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco) said in a statement. “He says it’s because of ‘fraud,’ but it has nothing to do with fraud and everything to do with politics. Florida had the largest Medicaid fraud in U.S. history yet isn’t on this list.”
Added California Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas (D-Hollister): “It is unconscionable for Trump and Republicans to rip away billions of dollars that support child care and families in need, and this has nothing to do with fraud. California taxpayers pay for these programs — period — and Trump has no right to steal from our hard-working residents. We will continue to fight back.”
Times staff writer Daniel Miller contributed to this report.
Politics
Video: Walz Drops Re-Election Bid as Minnesota Fraud Scandal Grows
new video loaded: Walz Drops Re-Election Bid as Minnesota Fraud Scandal Grows
transcript
transcript
Walz Drops Re-Election Bid as Minnesota Fraud Scandal Grows
Governor Tim Walz of Minnesota abandoned his re-election bid to focus on handling a scandal over fraud in social service programs that grew under his administration.
-
“I’ve decided to step out of this race, and I’ll let others worry about the election while I focus on the work that’s in front of me for the next year.” “All right, so this is Quality Learing Center — meant to say Quality ‘Learning’ Center.” “Right now we have around 56 kids enrolled. If the children are not here, we mark absence.”
By Shawn Paik
January 6, 2026
-
World1 week agoHamas builds new terror regime in Gaza, recruiting teens amid problematic election
-
News1 week agoFor those who help the poor, 2025 goes down as a year of chaos
-
Business1 week agoInstacart ends AI pricing test that charged shoppers different prices for the same items
-
Health1 week agoDid holiday stress wreak havoc on your gut? Doctors say 6 simple tips can help
-
Science1 week agoWe Asked for Environmental Fixes in Your State. You Sent In Thousands.
-
Technology1 week agoChatGPT’s GPT-5.2 is here, and it feels rushed
-
Business1 week agoA tale of two Ralphs — Lauren and the supermarket — shows the reality of a K-shaped economy
-
Politics1 week agoThe biggest losers of 2025: Who fell flat as the year closed