DOJ Accuses Judge of Bias in Transgender Troop Case

DOJ Accuses Judge of Bias in Transgender Troop Case \ Newslooks \ Washington DC \ Mary Sidiqi \ Evening Edition \ The Justice Department has filed a misconduct complaint against U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes, accusing her of bias and inappropriate conduct during hearings on President Donald Trump’s executive order banning transgender troops from military service. The DOJ alleges that Reyes embarrassed a government lawyer with rhetorical exercises and questioned his religious beliefs. The complaint escalates tensions between the Trump administration and the judiciary, as legal battles over presidential policies continue.

DOJ vs. Judge Ana Reyes: Quick Looks

• Misconduct Allegations: DOJ accuses Judge Reyes of bias and inappropriate behavior
• Key Complaint: Reyes questioned government lawyer’s religious views in court
• Trump’s Executive Order: Bans transgender troops from serving in the U.S. military
• Judicial Tensions: White House criticizes judges for blocking Trump’s policies
• Legal Challenges: Eight transgender plaintiffs sued to halt the executive order
• Judge’s Past Rulings: Known for strong rebukes against both government and plaintiff attorneys
• White House Response: Press secretary accuses judges of acting as activists

Deep Look

The Justice Department has filed a formal complaint against U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes, accusing her of judicial misconduct during hearings over President Donald Trump’s executive order banning transgender individuals from military service.

The complaint, submitted by Chad Mizelle, Chief of Staff to Attorney General Pam Bondi, seeks an investigation into Reyes’ conduct, claiming she demonstrated bias and disrespect toward government attorneys.

“An independent, impartial judiciary is fundamental to our system of justice,” Mizelle wrote in the filing. “When judges demonstrate apparent bias or treat counsel disrespectfully, public confidence in the judicial system is undermined.”

The complaint represents a sharp escalation in tensions between the Trump administration and the judiciary, which has ruled against several key presidential actions.

What Led to the Complaint?

The Justice Department’s complaint centers around two key incidents in which Judge Reyes allegedly embarrassed a government attorney and questioned his religious beliefs:

1. Rhetorical Exercise on Discrimination: Reyes instructed a government lawyer—who is a graduate of the University of Virginia Law School—to sit down, saying that under her new court rules, graduates of UVA were barred from practicing in her courtroom because they were “liars and lacked integrity.” The DOJ argues that this was meant to humiliate the attorney and exaggerate the government’s stance on discrimination.
2. Questioning Religious Beliefs: Reyes pressed the attorney on whether Jesus would approve of denying transgender individuals access to military service and homeless shelters. She asked:“Do you think Jesus would be, ‘Sounds right to me’?”The lawyer responded:“The United States is not going to speculate about what Jesus would have to say about anything.”

The Justice Department argues that these exchanges demonstrate judicial activism and an attempt to publicly embarrass the government’s legal team.

Reyes’ Legal History and Judicial Style

Judge Ana Reyes, appointed by President Joe Biden, is known for her no-nonsense approach in court. She has delivered strong rebukes to both government attorneys and plaintiff lawyers.

Earlier this month, Reyes criticized former U.S. Solicitor General Seth Waxman, who is representing eight government watchdogs suing the Trump administration over their firing. She dismissed an emergency motion, calling it “beyond comprehension” that the issue required a hearing rather than a “five-minute phone call.”

Despite her reputation for challenging both sides, the DOJ believes her comments in the transgender military ban case crossed ethical boundaries.

Trump’s Transgender Military Ban: What’s at Stake?

Trump’s January 27 executive order bans transgender individuals from serving in the U.S. military, arguing that gender identity conflicts with military discipline and readiness.

The order states:

“The sexual identity of transgender service members conflicts with a soldier’s commitment to an honorable, truthful, and disciplined lifestyle, even in one’s personal life.”

The directive requires Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to create a revised policy enforcing the ban.

A lawsuit filed by eight transgender plaintiffs, including six active-duty service members and two individuals seeking to enlist, argues that the ban is unconstitutional and rooted in hostility toward transgender people.

Their attorneys claim that Trump’s order expresses “animus” and impermissible discrimination, making it a violation of the Equal Protection Clause.

White House Pushes Back on Judicial Interference

The Trump administration has escalated its criticism of judges, especially those who block executive orders.

• White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt recently accused judges of acting as “activists rather than honest arbiters of the law.”
• Trump supporters have circulated photos of judges online, spread claims about their personal lives, and even suggested that the president ignore court orders altogether.

While Reyes has yet to rule on whether to temporarily block the administration from enforcing the transgender military ban, her comments indicate skepticism of the policy.

During a hearing, Reyes praised the service of transgender troops who sued to overturn the order, asking:

“If you were in a foxhole, would you care about these individuals’ gender identity?”

The government attorney conceded that it “would not be a primary concern.”

Congress and Public Reactions

Trump’s executive order has drawn bipartisan scrutiny, with some Republicans expressing concerns about its legality.

• Democrats accuse Trump of targeting LGBTQ+ individuals with policies designed to weaken their rights.
• Republicans are divided, with some arguing that military decisions should be left to the Pentagon rather than dictated by social policy debates.

Meanwhile, LGBTQ+ advocacy groups have denounced the ban, calling it a politically motivated attack on transgender service members.

What Comes Next?

• The chief judge of Washington’s federal court will review the DOJ’s complaint and decide whether to launch an investigation into Judge Reyes.
• Reyes is expected to rule on the temporary injunction against Trump’s transgender military ban in early March.
• The lawsuit will likely proceed through multiple appeals, potentially reaching the Supreme Court.

As the legal battle continues, the case represents a larger fight over judicial power, executive authority, and LGBTQ+ rights in the United States.

More on US News

DOJ Accuses Judge