Author: Riley Ceder

  • Transgender troops granted class action lawsuit against government

    Transgender troops granted class action lawsuit against government

    A federal court issued a ruling Tuesday that paves the way for all transgender service members to continue serving in the military despite a Trump administration policy that ordered their removal.

    The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia granted a motion to certify Talbott v. USA as a class action lawsuit several weeks after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit said in a June 1 ruling that the Pentagon’s transgender military ban was unlawful.

    The June ruling only allowed the plaintiffs in that case to continue serving, meaning all other transgender service members are currently still banned from the military. But if the class action lawsuit goes into effect in two weeks along with with the June ruling, the protections won in Talbott v. USA would extend to all transgender service members currently serving.

    “The protection afforded to our plaintiffs should be available to all transgender servicemembers and their families,” said National Center for LGBTQ Rights Legal Director Shannon Minter. “We know that this ban is discriminatory, rooted in animus, and irrationally excludes highly decorated servicemembers who have deployed around the world and given everything to our country.”

    President Donald Trump signed an executive order on Jan. 27, 2025, stating that service members with a history of “gender dysphoria” have medical, surgical and mental health constraints “incompatible with the high mental and physical standards necessary for military service.”

    Transgender troops previously needed a gender dysphoria diagnosis in order to receive gender affirming care while in the military and, as a result, many transgender service members have the term in their medical record.

    Approximately 4,240 transgender individuals are serving in the military have a gender dysphoria diagnosis, both on active duty and in the reserves, according to an Associated Press report.

    The Defense Department rolled out a sweeping “voluntary separation” policy last February that attempted to incentivize transgender military service members to separate from the military by offering more money than they’d otherwise receive for involuntary separation.

    Service members who Military Times spoke to at the time said the move was anything but voluntary, as they wanted to continue to serve and saw the policy as a way to kick them out.

    Transgender service members have either been voluntarily or involuntarily separated or are in the process of being separated while on paid administrative leave.

    The National Center for LGBTQ Rights and GLAD Law filed a lawsuit against Trump on Jan. 28, 2025, alleging that the ban was unconstitutional because the policy was based on animus.

    The lawsuit eventually shifted so that the plaintiffs were suing the U.S. government.

    The United States District Court for the District of Columbia issued a nationwide preliminary injunction on March 18, 2025, blocking the discharge of transgender service members, which the newly enacted Defense Department policy called for.

    The U.S. government appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, which ultimately ruled in the plaintiffs’ favor over a year later on June 1, 2026.

    The government has 45 days after the June 1 ruling to file a petition for rehearing.

    The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit can either accept or deny that request.

    The government can also ask the entire U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit to rehear the case, which would comprise 11 active judges, as opposed to a three-judge panel, like the one that decided the June 1 ruling.

    If the government went that route, the ruling of that rehearing would go into effect seven days after the decision.

    The Trump administration could also ask the U.S. Supreme Court to issue an emergency stay to stop the preliminary injunction and class action lawsuit from going into effect.

    The government hasn’t filed as of Wednesday.

    This post was originally published on this site.

  • Transgender troops granted class action lawsuit against government

    Transgender troops granted class action lawsuit against government

    A federal court issued a ruling Tuesday that paves the way for all transgender service members to continue serving in the military despite a Trump administration policy that ordered their removal.

    The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia granted a motion to certify Talbott v. USA as a class action lawsuit several weeks after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit said in a June 1 ruling that the Pentagon’s transgender military ban was unlawful.

    The June ruling only allowed the plaintiffs in that case to continue serving, meaning all other transgender service members are currently still banned from the military. But if the class action lawsuit goes into effect in two weeks along with with the June ruling, the protections won in Talbott v. USA would extend to all transgender service members currently serving.

    “The protection afforded to our plaintiffs should be available to all transgender servicemembers and their families,” said National Center for LGBTQ Rights Legal Director Shannon Minter. “We know that this ban is discriminatory, rooted in animus, and irrationally excludes highly decorated servicemembers who have deployed around the world and given everything to our country.”

    President Donald Trump signed an executive order on Jan. 27, 2025, stating that service members with a history of “gender dysphoria” have medical, surgical and mental health constraints “incompatible with the high mental and physical standards necessary for military service.”

    Transgender troops previously needed a gender dysphoria diagnosis in order to receive gender affirming care while in the military and, as a result, many transgender service members have the term in their medical record.

    Approximately 4,240 transgender individuals are serving in the military have a gender dysphoria diagnosis, both on active duty and in the reserves, according to an Associated Press report.

    The Defense Department rolled out a sweeping “voluntary separation” policy last February that attempted to incentivize transgender military service members to separate from the military by offering more money than they’d otherwise receive for involuntary separation.

    Service members who Military Times spoke to at the time said the move was anything but voluntary, as they wanted to continue to serve and saw the policy as a way to kick them out.

    Transgender service members have either been voluntarily or involuntarily separated or are in the process of being separated while on paid administrative leave.

    The National Center for LGBTQ Rights and GLAD Law filed a lawsuit against Trump on Jan. 28, 2025, alleging that the ban was unconstitutional because the policy was based on animus.

    The lawsuit eventually shifted so that the plaintiffs were suing the U.S. government.

    The United States District Court for the District of Columbia issued a nationwide preliminary injunction on March 18, 2025, blocking the discharge of transgender service members, which the newly enacted Defense Department policy called for.

    The U.S. government appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, which ultimately ruled in the plaintiffs’ favor over a year later on June 1, 2026.

    The government has 45 days after the June 1 ruling to file a petition for rehearing.

    The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit can either accept or deny that request.

    The government can also ask the entire U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit to rehear the case, which would comprise 11 active judges, as opposed to a three-judge panel, like the one that decided the June 1 ruling.

    If the government went that route, the ruling of that rehearing would go into effect seven days after the decision.

    The Trump administration could also ask the U.S. Supreme Court to issue an emergency stay to stop the preliminary injunction and class action lawsuit from going into effect.

    The government hasn’t filed as of Wednesday.

    This post was originally published on this site.

  • Transgender troops granted class action lawsuit against government

    Transgender troops granted class action lawsuit against government

    A federal court issued a ruling Tuesday that paves the way for all transgender service members to continue serving in the military despite a Trump administration policy that ordered their removal.

    The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia granted a motion to certify Talbott v. USA as a class action lawsuit several weeks after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit said in a June 1 ruling that the Pentagon’s transgender military ban was unlawful.

    The June ruling only allowed the plaintiffs in that case to continue serving, meaning all other transgender service members are currently still banned from the military. But if the class action lawsuit goes into effect in two weeks along with with the June ruling, the protections won in Talbott v. USA would extend to all transgender service members currently serving.

    “The protection afforded to our plaintiffs should be available to all transgender servicemembers and their families,” said National Center for LGBTQ Rights Legal Director Shannon Minter. “We know that this ban is discriminatory, rooted in animus, and irrationally excludes highly decorated servicemembers who have deployed around the world and given everything to our country.”

    President Donald Trump signed an executive order on Jan. 27, 2025, stating that service members with a history of “gender dysphoria” have medical, surgical and mental health constraints “incompatible with the high mental and physical standards necessary for military service.”

    Transgender troops previously needed a gender dysphoria diagnosis in order to receive gender affirming care while in the military and, as a result, many transgender service members have the term in their medical record.

    Approximately 4,240 transgender individuals are serving in the military have a gender dysphoria diagnosis, both on active duty and in the reserves, according to an Associated Press report.

    The Defense Department rolled out a sweeping “voluntary separation” policy last February that attempted to incentivize transgender military service members to separate from the military by offering more money than they’d otherwise receive for involuntary separation.

    Service members who Military Times spoke to at the time said the move was anything but voluntary, as they wanted to continue to serve and saw the policy as a way to kick them out.

    Transgender service members have either been voluntarily or involuntarily separated or are in the process of being separated while on paid administrative leave.

    The National Center for LGBTQ Rights and GLAD Law filed a lawsuit against Trump on Jan. 28, 2025, alleging that the ban was unconstitutional because the policy was based on animus.

    The lawsuit eventually shifted so that the plaintiffs were suing the U.S. government.

    The United States District Court for the District of Columbia issued a nationwide preliminary injunction on March 18, 2025, blocking the discharge of transgender service members, which the newly enacted Defense Department policy called for.

    The U.S. government appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, which ultimately ruled in the plaintiffs’ favor over a year later on June 1, 2026.

    The government has 45 days after the June 1 ruling to file a petition for rehearing.

    The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit can either accept or deny that request.

    The government can also ask the entire U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit to rehear the case, which would comprise 11 active judges, as opposed to a three-judge panel, like the one that decided the June 1 ruling.

    If the government went that route, the ruling of that rehearing would go into effect seven days after the decision.

    The Trump administration could also ask the U.S. Supreme Court to issue an emergency stay to stop the preliminary injunction and class action lawsuit from going into effect.

    The government hasn’t filed as of Wednesday.

    This post was originally published on this site

  • Coast Guard Cutter Bear returns home after seizing more than $63 milli

    PORTSMOUTH, Va. — The crew of Coast Guard Cutter Bear (WMEC 901) returned to their home port in Portsmouth, Tuesday, after a 74-day deployment in support of Operation Pacific Viper, a Coast Guard

  • U.S. Coast Guard sets Port Heavy Weather Condition X-RAY for Guam and

    SANTA RITA, Guam— The U.S. Coast Guard Captain of the Port (COTP) for Guam and the Marianas set Port Heavy Weather Condition (PHWC) X-RAY for the Ports of Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern

  • UPDATE 02: Coast Guard responds to helicopter crash in Sitka, Alaska

    JUNEAU, Alaska — The Coast Guard is actively investigating the helicopter crash on Harbor Mountain that occurred June 22, 2026.The four crew members involved in the crash were treated for minor

  • US Coast Guard Barque Eagle to offer free public tours during Sail4th

    NEW YORK — The U.S. Coast Guard Cutter Eagle, is scheduled to arrive in New York City to participate in the Sail4th 250 celebrations. During its port call, the Eagle will moor in Manhattan at Pier 17

  • U.S. Coast Guard prepares for Typhoon Bavi, urges Marianas residents t

    SANTA RITA, Guam — The U.S. Coast Guard team in Guam is coordinating with the National Weather Service, Guam Homeland Security/Office of Civil Defense, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands

  • 64 sailors sickened by diesel exhaust fumes from USS Nebraska

    64 sailors sickened by diesel exhaust fumes from USS Nebraska

    Dozens of U.S. Navy service members became ill after being exposed to diesel exhaust fumes from the Ohio-class ballistic missile submarine USS Nebraska on June 22, the Navy confirmed.

    Sixty-four sailors experienced coughing, headaches, lightheadedness, dizziness and nausea while working a routine pier shift at Naval Base Kitsap-Bangor in Silverdale, Washington.

    The service members were near a functioning backup diesel generator when the poisoning occurred. They also experienced irritation of the eyes, nose and throat.

    “The Navy is working to identify the precise cause of the event and will take corrective action as appropriate,” the service said.

    Six sailors were admitted for further medical attention, but all have since been released.

    The diesel generator onboard does not affect the submarine’s nuclear reactor when running, the Navy said, and the reactor was undisturbed.

    The 560-foot-long Ohio-class ballistic missile submarine is designed to carry ballistic missiles and nuclear warheads and can descend to depths of 800 feet.

    This post was originally published on this site.

  • Time spent on select Super Hornet repairs could be cut in half with Navy’s 3D printing

    Time spent on select Super Hornet repairs could be cut in half with Navy’s 3D printing

    Composite repair time for F/A-18 Super Hornets could be slashed in half with a groundbreaking 3D-printing repair method, according to the Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division.

    By utilizing a “high-performance, 3D-printed composite patches that can be applied directly onto the aircraft,” the 3D-printing method has the possibility of enabling sailors to perform complex composite fixes directly at forward operating bases, abandoning the need for “highly specialized maintenance artisans” and lengthy turnaround times that can cause severe delays, a Wednesday release notes.

    “Our goal is to put capability directly into the hands of the Fleet,” NAWCAD Commander Rear Adm. Todd Evans said in the release. “By simplifying a complex repair so it can be done forward, our engineers would get aircraft back in the fight faster — it’s a smart solution that makes our squadrons more self-sufficient and directly improves operational readiness.”

    Typically, the repair of the grounded F/A-18 can cause significant delays as naval crews wait for parts to be shipped back to repair depots in the U.S. and then shipped back to the fleet. In the interim, the Navy loses critical combat capability as it stretches to repair its fighter jet.

    To contend with this, a joint team of engineers from NAWCAD and Fleet Readiness Center Southwest developed the 3D-printed composite patches, allowing crews to rapidly assess and repair the damaged plane in 50% less time.

    After successful lab and ground tests, flight-tests are slated to begin on operational aircraft this summer.

    The patch job comes as the U.S. Marine Corps moves to deactivate all remaining Hornet squadrons by 2030 and eliminate the maintenance specialties associated with the aging fighter jet as it transitions to an all-F-35 tactical aircraft fleet, according to previous Military Times reporting.

    According to the release, 22 Navy maintenances sites across the globe already possess 3D printers, potentially allowing for swift repairs where the aircraft actively operate.

    This post was originally published on this site.