Connect with us

Politics

Transgender military ban will take effect during ongoing court battle

Published

on

Transgender military ban will take effect during ongoing court battle

The Trump administration’s ban on transgender people serving in the military is scheduled to take effect Friday after delays and ongoing court challenges to the controversial Department of Defense (DOD) policy. 

D.C.-based U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes, a Biden appointee, presided over a hearing March 21 where she requested the department delay its original March 26 deadline to enact the policy. 

Reyes said she wanted to allow more time for the appeals process. She also said she had previously allowed plenty of time to appeal her earlier opinion blocking the ban from going into effect. 

“I don’t want to jam up the D.C. Circuit. That’s my main concern here,” Reyes said during the March 21 hearing. “My chambers worked incredibly hard to get out an opinion on time.”

A SECOND JUDGE RULES AGAINST TRUMP’S REMOVAL OF TRANSGENDER TROOPS

Advertisement

President Donald Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth are pictured here. The Defense Department’s ban on transgender people serving in the military is scheduled to take effect Friday.  (Getty Images)

Reyes gave the government a 3 p.m. deadline that same day to return about her request to push the deadline. 

The government responded, saying it agreed to delay the March 26 deadline to March 28. 

The legal challenge comes as the U.S. Supreme Court also considers a high-profile case dealing with transgender rights. The issue in the case, United States vs. Skrmetti, is whether the equal protection clause, which requires the government to treat similarly situated people the same, prohibits states from allowing medical providers to deliver puberty blockers and hormones to assist with a minor’s transition to another sex.

HEGSETH SUGGESTS JUDGE REPORT TO MILITARY BASES AFTER RULING THAT PENTAGON MUST ALLOW TRANSGENDER TROOPS

Advertisement

A decision from the high court, however, is not expected until May or June. 

“The Skrmetti decision will occupy a good bit of the field here and provide some guidance. And so I doubt the D.C. Circuit is going to feel the need to rush things,” Charles Stimson, senior legal fellow at the Heritage Foundation, told Fox News Digital. 

“If I was sitting on the D.C. Circuit and I had all these other cases coming my way, and I was on a three-judge panel, I don’t think it’d be the top of my pile.”

D.C.-based U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes, a Biden appointee, held a hearing March 21 and requested that the Department of Defense delay its original Mar. 26 enactment deadline.  (Getty/SenatorDurbin via YouTube)

Despite the looming deadline, Stimson said the ban will be “on pause” as the parties work through the appellate process. 

Advertisement

“I don’t think the secretary is going to do anything in violation of a court order,” Stimson said. “Even if they disagree with that, you’d be wise not to.”

TRUMP ADMIN ASKS FEDERAL JUDGE TO DISSOLVE INJUNCTION BARRING TRANSGENDER MILITARY BAN

Reyes had issued a preliminary injunction in favor of the plaintiffs March 18. Reyes wrote in her opinion that the plaintiffs in the suit, who include transgender individuals, “face a violation of their constitutional rights, which constitutes irreparable harm” that would warrant a preliminary injunction.”

On March 21, the defendants in the suit, who include President Donald Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, filed a motion to dissolve the injunction blocking the Pentagon’s ban. The filing argued that the policy is not an overarching ban but instead “turns on gender dysphoria – a medical condition – and does not discriminate against trans-identifying persons as a class.”

On March 21, the defendants in the suit, who include President Donald Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, filed a motion to dissolve the injunction blocking the Pentagon’s ban.  (Reuters/Yves Herman)

Advertisement

The Trump administration further requested that, if the motion to dissolve is denied, the court should stay the preliminary injunction pending appeal.

The government cited new guidance issued March 21 that it expected to enact the policy it not for the ongoing litigation. The guidance clarified that “the phrase ‘exhibit symptoms consistent with gender dysphoria’” solely applies to “‘individuals who exhibit such symptoms as would be sufficient to constitute a diagnosis.’”

In its motion requesting to dissolve the March 18 injunction, the government wrote that the March 21 guidance constitutes a “significant change” that would warrant the court dissolving the injunction. 

CLICK TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Under the requirements, a party requesting to dissolve a preliminary injunction must demonstrate “a significant change either in factual conditions or in law” that shows that continued enforcement of the order would be “detrimental to the public interest.” 

Advertisement

“The March 21, 2025, guidance constitutes a ‘significant change,’” the filing states. “Whereas the Court has broadly construed the scope of the DoD Policy to encompass all trans-identifying servicemembers or applicants, the new guidance underscores Defendants’ consistent position that the DoD Policy is concerned with the military readiness, deployability, and costs associated with a medical condition — one that every prior Administration has, to some degree, kept out of the military.”

Fox News’ Jake Gibson contributed to this report. 

Advertisement

Politics

Crews Drape Tarp Over White House in Latest Trump Restoration

Published

on

Construction workers unfurled a large printed tarp to cover scaffolding installed at the White House’s front entrance. Doug Burgum, the interior secretary, said President Trump had ordered the repairs after noticing damage to columns.

Continue Reading

Politics

WATCH: Trump’s Energy chief reveals what escalating Iran tensions could mean for gas prices

Published

on

WATCH: Trump’s Energy chief reveals what escalating Iran tensions could mean for gas prices

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Energy Secretary Chris Wright is telling Americans not to be concerned about the possibility of another surge of sharp increases in gasoline prices as tensions with Iran have started to escalate once again.

Asked whether Americans should worry about higher prices at the pump and how the Trump administration is preparing to keep the economy stable if the conflict continues to worsen, Wright told Fox News Digital: “It has not been any good behavior from Iran that’s allowed oil to flow. It’s been the United States military.”

“That’s not changing,” he assured, speaking from the Great American State Fair on the National Mall this week.

US CLAWS BACK KEY CONCESSION TO IRAN AFTER FRESH ATTACKS ON COMMERCIAL SHIPS IN STRAIT OF HORMUZ

Advertisement

(Mario Tama/Getty Images) (Mario Tama/Getty Images)

With Iran striking three commercial vessels transiting the Strait of Hormuz on Monday and Tuesday, Wright doubled down in urging citizens to not credit Iran for the U.S. military’s work to ensure oil shipments continue flowing through the strait.

“Look, the U.S. Military has been the key asset here,” he said. “They have assured the flow of oil and gas through the Strait of Hormuz throughout. Not at the beginning of this conflict, but through the last six weeks.”

Wright said the administration is closely monitoring global oil supplies as the tentative ceasefire with Iran seemingly came to come to a halt, with President Donald Trump telling Secretary-General Mark Rutte the call for peace with Iran is “over” at the NATO Summit in Turkey on Wednesday.

But, he pointed to the continued shipping through the Strait as evidence that markets should remain stable.

Advertisement

TRUMP SAYS IRAN CEASEFIRE IS ‘OVER’ AFTER IRANIAN ATTACKS TRIGGER MASSIVE US RESPONSE

President Donald Trump speaks at the White House on Tuesday, April 22. (AP/Alex Brandon)

“We’re of course constantly watching the supply of oil, the supply of refined products and what’s going on there,” Wright said. “And I think still all positive trends.”

Beyond geopolitical concerns, Wright also praised the new chain of discounted gas stations across Pennsylvania and New Jersey, Freedom Fuel, which promises customers prices below the national average.

The Trump administration, though not involved with the network, has heavily endorsed the new chain and its 25 locations.

Advertisement

“We love it,” Wright said when asked about Freedom Fuel. “I mean, look, any mechanism we can to lower energy costs for Americans of all kinds, we’re all in on.”

“With Freedom Fuels, they’re just lowering it down to their wholesale price of gasoline,” Wright said. “So they’re not making any money selling gasoline, but they’ve got convenience stores. That’s how most gas stations make money.”

NEWSOM UNDER FIRE AS CALIFORNIA GAS TAX HIKE SENDS PUMP PRICES EVEN HIGHER

Gasoline costs are a known concern for many Americans, and amid surging prices there has been a considerable increase in those opting to purchase electric vehicles to save money long-term at the pump — with Tesla dominating the market for these types of models.

Wright argued one of the benefits to living in America is having the option to choose what type of vehicle you drive.

Advertisement

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

“We just want people to buy what they would prefer,” he told Fox News Digital when asked his thoughts on increasing calls for support of the electrification of cars. “Consumer choice — you wanna buy an electric car, you wanna buy a gas powered car, diesel powered car, buy a big truck. That’s the choice.”

“That’s why you live in America. You get the choice of all those.”

Continue Reading

Politics

Black mold and $1 wages: Settlement forces immigrant detention centers to protect workers

Published

on

Black mold and  wages: Settlement forces immigrant detention centers to protect workers

In 2023, California regulators levied more than $100,000 in fines against the private operator of a federal immigration facility, kicking off a three-year battle over whether detainees who do work at the facilities should be considered employees.

The question went beyond semantics: If considered employees, the detainees would be subject to state worker protection laws.

A legal settlement announced this week now affirms that private immigrant detention facilities are subject to California’s workplace safety and health requirements.

“Every worker deserves a safe and healthy workplace and should be able to report workplace hazards without fear of retaliation,” said Denisse Gómez, spokesperson for the California Division of Occupational Safety and Health or Cal/OSHA.

Advertisement

“Individuals who perform work in these facilities are entitled to workplace safety protections, and this settlement reinforces Cal/OSHA’s commitment to enforcing those protections and safeguarding vulnerable workers,” she added.

Under the settlement between California and the GEO Group, a Florida-based private prison company, the company recently withdrew its legal challenges and agreed to pay more than $100,000 in the fines.

The GEO Group did not respond to requests for comment.

Back in 2023, Cal/OSHA issued $104,510 in fines against the GEO Group. The agency had found six violations of state code by the company after detainees complained about a lack of protective equipment and proper training while cleaning the facility for $1 per day.

Detainees alleged they routinely wiped black mold off shower walls at the facility, saw black dust spew from air vents and used cleaning solutions that lacked instructions during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Advertisement

The biggest fine levied against the GEO Group was for failure to establish and maintain “effective written procedures to reduce employee risk of exposure to aerosol transmissible disease.”

Advocates viewed Cal/OSHA’S recognition of the detainees as workers as a victory that could pave the way for future labor rights fights at other detention centers in the state.

But the GEO Group appealed, arguing that detainees participating in ICE’s voluntary work program make their own schedules and aren’t employees, so hazard exposure couldn’t be “as a result of assigned duties,” as California law states. Plus, the company argued, there wasn’t enough evidence that detainees were exposed to any hazard.

Early last year, the state’s Occupational Safety and Health Appeals Board rejected the GEO Group’s argument and found that detainees should be considered “affected employees.”

The GEO Group sued, but three days before a California Superior Court hearing in May, the company and Cal/OSHA reached the settlement.

Advertisement

Along with paying the fines, the GEO Group agreed to draft plans for avoiding aerosol transmissions at 12 secure and reentry facilities in California, including five detention centers that hold immigrants.

“GEO ensures detainees are afforded the necessary tools, equipment, and personal protective equipment … to safely and effectively perform any necessary tasks,” the settlement states.

Gómez said the settlement also leaves intact the appeals board’s ruling that civil immigration detainees who participate in work programs can participate in proceedings anonymously, “acknowledging the potential for retaliation when individuals raise workplace safety concerns.”

But the question of whether detainees are employees and deserve certain protections isn’t entirely resolved — at least not for the federal government.

Last month, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement released new standards for detention facilities across the country. The revised guidelines “emphasize that detainee volunteers participating in the voluntary work program are not considered facility and/or government employees” and thus not entitled to labor regulations.

Advertisement

Attorney Mariel Villarreal said the timing of the new detention standards made her question whether the GEO Group had asked ICE to specify in its standards that detainees are not workers in response to its battle with Cal/OSHA.

“To me, it’s a reaction to this very settlement,” she said. Villarreal works for the California Collaborative for Immigrant Justice, which filed the original complaint on behalf of detainees who said they worked in unsafe conditions.

Villarreal pointed to a Washington Post report that GEO Group executives privately asked ICE to specify that detainees are not employees of the facilities where they work. Two top Trump administration officials, border czar Tom Homan and acting ICE director David Venturella, previously worked for the GEO Group.

New versions of ICE detention standards take effect as contracts are established or modified, so this year’s rules won’t immediately apply to every facility.

An ICE spokesperson did not comment about the settlement. The spokesperson, who did not provide their name in an emailed statement Wednesday, said the agency has begun transitioning detention facilities to meet the 2026 standards, “building on its longstanding commitment to safe, secure, and professional detention operations.”

Advertisement

“ICE has consistently implemented many of these best practices independently, reinforcing its role as the leader in detention operations,” the spokesperson added.

The GEO Group and other immigrant detention center operators have faced other legal battles over workers’ rights, including lawsuits in Washington, Colorado and California over the $1-per-day payment.

Villarreal said she’s confident that the Cal/OSHA settlement would continue to hold even if California facilities incorporated the new standards. But she said she believes the statements are an attempt by the GEO Group to “sidestep responsibility” and avoid the possibility of being fined under similar circumstances in other states.

“These statements in the new standards are a way for them to try and preserve profits as much as possible,” she said. “GEO and ICE are so intertwined at this point that they have the same motives.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending