DOJ issues complaint about federal judge’s ‘misconduct’ while presiding over military trans ban court case

The Department of Justice (DOJ) has sent a written complaint about U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes to the Chief Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, Sri Srinivasan, following a tense case between the Trump administration and two LGBTQ groups.

The letter, signed by Attorney General Pam Bondi’s Chief of Staff, Chad Mizelle, concerns what the DOJ characterized as Reyes’ “misconduct” during the proceedings in Nicolas Talbott et al. v. Donald J. Trump et al., a case brought by two LGBTQ groups challenging the Trump Administration’s Executive Orders barring transgender individuals from serving in the U.S. military. 

According to the complaint, the transcript “reveals multiple instances where Judge Reyes’ misconduct compromised the dignity of the proceedings and demonstrated potential bias, raising serious concerns about her ability to preside impartially in this matter.” 

JUDGE GRANTS 19 AGS PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION AGAINST DOGE ACCESS TO TREASURY PAYMENT SYSTEM

During the proceedings, Judge Reyes listed off executive orders signed by President Trump since taking office, including recognizing only two sexes, blocking school funding from promoting the idea that gender can be fluid, directing the State Department to stop issuing documents allowing a third gender marker, and revoking the ability of trans federal employees to receive a sex change. She also called out the Trump administration for revoking an earlier regulation concerning trans people having equal access to homeless shelters. 

OFFICIALS PUSH BACK ON CLAIMS ON ‘LIST’ OF GENERALS HEGSETH PLANS TO FIRE AT PENTAGON

The letter says Judge Reyes asked DOJ attorney Jason Lynch, “What do you think Jesus would say to telling a group of people that they are so worthless … that we’re not going to allow them into homeless shelters? Do you think Jesus would be, ‘Sounds right to me?’ Or do you think Jesus would say, ‘WTF? Of course, let them in?'”

DOJ attorneys asserted that the line of questioning was “deeply problematic for several reasons” – including placing DOJ counsel in an untenable position of either appearing unresponsive or speculating about how an incoherent hypothetical aligns with Reyes’ personal religious beliefs.

The letter highlighted another incident in which Judge Reyes engaged in a rhetorical exercise to draw parallels to trans people being barred from military service. The judge instructed DOJ counsel, “My new standing order says that no one who graduated from UVA Law School can appear before me. So, I need you to sit down, please. I need you to sit down.” 

TRUMP SAYS DEAL WITH UKRAINE FOR US ACCESS TO ITS RARE EARTH MINERALS IS ‘PRETTY CLOSE’

When counsel complied with this directive, the judge continued her hypothetical about UVA law graduates being banned from her courtroom because “they’re all liars and lack integrity.” The letter alleged that only after Judge Reyes used counsel as a physical prop did she allow him to continue the proceedings. She then asked counsel if he saw how unfair the reasoning was. 

Still, the DOJ asserted in its complaint that such treatment “undermines the dignity of counsel and the decorum of the courtroom.” 

There were times when Judge Reyes commended DOJ lawyer Jason Lynch, telling him and the gallery that he was doing a credible job arguing for the government in a difficult situation.

The letter closes by requesting that “appropriate action be taken to address these violations,” saying that, at a “minimum, this matter warrants further investigation to determine whether these incidents represent a pattern of misconduct that requires more significant remedial measures.”

U.S. District Court judges sit on the bench as a lifetime appointment. However, it is possible that Chief Judge Srinivasan could reprimand Judge Reyes, or possibly suggest she recuse herself from the case.