The U.S. Coast Guard is unduly burdening the rights of a Coast Guard veteran by dragging its toes on a spiritual lodging request over elusive transgender insurance policies, in response to an lawyer representing a potential Coastie who takes opposition.
Jonathan Sanders was honorably discharged from the Coast Guard in 2009 after eight years of service. In 2023, because the Coast Guard reeled from recruiting and retention lows on the behest of the now-rescinded COVID-19 shot mandate and the implementation of woke insurance policies, Sanders determined to serve his nation once more in uniform.
He met with recruiters and was on observe to return to service when a crashing wave of uncertainty about his future overcame him. Gender insurance policies had modified through the years, and the Coast Guard had now endorsed transgenderism—one thing Sanders took an ethical and scientific objection to attributable to his sincerely held non secular convictions.
“Mr. Sanders had conscience points with calling somebody of 1 organic intercourse by the pronoun of the opposite organic intercourse,” mentioned Sanders’ lawyer, Affiliate Professor Antony Kolenc, a retired Air Drive JAG with over 21 years of service, who now directs the Veterans and Servicemembers Regulation Clinic (VSLC) at Ave Maria School of Law in Naples, Florida.
Sanders was additionally reluctant to bunk or bathe with somebody of the other organic intercourse for ethical causes. After bringing this to the eye of recruiters, they merely directed him to the transgender coverage of the Coast Guard with the expectation that he would abide by it.
In a collection of emails exchanged to inquire extra concerning the coverage, Sanders was confronted by U.S. Coast Guard Headquarters, asserting he must handle different Coasties by their most popular genders, including that the difficulty was “non-negotiable.” In accordance with Kolenc, authorities instructed Sanders, “Our oath of enlistment requires that we obey the orders of the President of the USA and the orders of the officers appointed over us, and respecting our shipmates is a pillar of our core values.”
When Kolenc requested for “the insurance policies,” all he was supplied had been insurance policies about how Coasties can transition to the other intercourse. “I assumed it was a bit of unusual that they’re appearing like there’s this non-negotiable coverage about pronouns however can’t present us something to show it.”
Disillusioned however refusing to again down, Sanders had no different possibility however to hunt authorized counsel with the authorized clinic at Ave Maria College of Regulation. He felt referred to as to take a stand not solely to defend his personal rights but additionally to assist others who may need an identical conscience objection.
Sanders instructed The Gateway Pundit:
“I attempted actually arduous to discover a means to make use of most popular pronouns. I simply couldn’t get previous my conscience. I even supplied to make use of generic pronouns like they/them or to easily use a member’s rank. That was the very best I might give you. I actually, actually tried.”
“After doing our background analysis,” Kolenc mentioned, “we despatched a requirement letter to the Coast Guard on April 23, 2024.” The letter went by the recruiting workplace Sanders was working with, primarily laying out the info of his argument. “We thought it was a knee-jerk response for the Coast Guard to position an unconstitutional situation on the re-accession of an honorably discharged veteran merely as a result of he requested a few coverage.”
Kolenc views the Coast Guard’s motion as a transparent violation of the First Modification underneath the Compelled Speech doctrine as a result of “the Coast Guard is attempting to compel folks to make use of sure pronouns, and in the event that they don’t use these pronouns, headquarters will not be even contemplating them for recruitment.” Additional, due to the First Modification and the Non secular Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), “the Coast Guard must accommodate somebody who has expressed a honest non secular objection to this, particularly when the member is keen to compromise as a lot as Mr. Sanders has achieved right here.”
In July, the Coast Guard lastly responded by electronic mail, stating, “The Coast Guard transgender coverage will not be supposed to dictate Mr. Sanders’ proper to assume and imagine as he needs. The Coast Guard’s Navy Transgender Service coverage requires that every one Coast Guard members be thought of and handled in accordance with the member’s gender recorded in DEERS, together with members who’ve transitioned genders.”
View the entire electronic mail excerpt:
In Kolenc’s opinion, “The Coast Guard mainly ignored our compelled speech argument, but it surely mentioned that Sanders might pursue a spiritual lodging request (RAR).”
Whereas objection on non secular grounds was not his sole purpose for opposing the “transgender coverage,” Sanders determined to pursue the lodging request, submitting the request on August 7, 2024. Sanders emphasised his willingness to make use of an individual’s rank and final title or gender-neutral pronouns, equivalent to they and them. Nevertheless, he acknowledged that he couldn’t consent to calling a fellow Coastie by a pronoun reverse of their organic intercourse at delivery. “I’m not in opposition to transgender sailors; I’m in opposition to unlawful orders and expectations,” Sanders shared.
On September 19, the Coast Guard acknowledged that Sanders’ RAR was “in course of” and that processing of such requests had been “averaging about three to 4 months for adjudication.”
In accordance with Kolenc, this violates the 45-day deadline required by Coast Guard regulations. “That will have been September 22,” he identified. Because of this, he mentioned, “My shopper seems like they’re not taking him critically.” Each he and Sanders need a determination to be made as quickly as doable.
With out an RAR willpower, to this point, Kolenc suspects, “they’re stonewalling on this.” Kolenc lamented, “It’s deeply troubling that that is taking so lengthy, notably at a time when recruiting and retention is so difficult within the army providers.”
The Gateway Pundit reached out to LCDR Brad Baker, a Deputy Employees Choose Advocate, in addition to Coast Guard Media Relations with the next questions:
- Are you able to present me any non-negotiable coverage in writing that states that every one Coast Guard members should handle their friends by their most popular pronouns?
- If no coverage exists, why are you requiring Mr. Sanders to observe such a coverage?
- Why is it taking so lengthy to grant or deny an lodging when apparently the regulation requires a response in 45 days, in response to Mr. Sanders?
- Have there been any circumstances the place the Coast Guard has encountered this conscience difficulty previous to Mr. Sanders’ case? What occurred in these circumstances?
- Is the Coast Guard presently requiring members to bathe with these of the other organic intercourse?
Neither LCDR Baker nor CG Media Relations responded by press time.