Transgenderism sure is making its way into the news a lot these days (such as here, here, and here). It’s making its way through the legal system, too. And…the barracks?

‘Round and ’round we go–

On Friday, attorneys for the U.S. government petitioned the Supreme Court to reinstate the ban on transgender servicemen…or, that would be, servicepeople.

The issue is still percolating, by the way, in federal appeals courts in D.C., California, and Washington.

The petition — on behalf of President Trump — contends, if I may interpret and expound a bit, that the military isn’t grounds for social experimentation or activism, and instead, it should focus on its most functional capacity to kill people and break things.

The submission reads (in part) as follows:

“The district court in this case entered a nationwide preliminary injunction nullifying that exercise of professional military judgment and blocking the implementation of a policy that the secretary has deemed necessary to ‘place the Department of Defense in the strongest position to protect the American people, to fight and win America’s wars, and to ensure the survival and success of our service members around the world.'”

The filing utilizes an unusual procedure called a “petition for certiorari before judgement,” which means it asks the Supreme Court to decide on a matter despite it not yet having completed its course through the lower courts.

That sounds like Trump — go straight to the top; take care of business and move on.

Actually, Trump reminds me of bit of Arnold Schwarzenegger. Here’s an old quote from Arnold:

“My instinct was to win, eliminate anyone who is in competition, destroy my enemy, and move on without any kind of hesitation at all.”

Doesn’t that sound like The Donald?

Last July, he tweeted that transgenderism wouldn’t be allowed in the service — a reversal on Obama’s order to let everybody just be fabulous (see more about the issue here):

“After consultation with my Generals and military experts, please be advised that the United States Government will not accept or allow Transgender individuals to serve in any capacity in the U.S. Military. Our military must be focused on decisive and overwhelming victory and cannot be burdened with the tremendous medical costs and disruption that transgender in the military would entail. Thank you.”

After consultation with my Generals and military experts, please be advised that the United States Government will not accept or allow……

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 26, 2017

….Transgender individuals to serve in any capacity in the U.S. Military. Our military must be focused on decisive and overwhelming…..

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 26, 2017

….victory and cannot be burdened with the tremendous medical costs and disruption that transgender in the military would entail. Thank you

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 26, 2017

Surprise! — All that got challenged in court, and here we are. Judges in Maryland, D.C., and Washington all issued injunctions halting Trump’s maneuver.

As for the rarity of the petition for certiorari before judgement, NBC News had this to say:

“The Supreme Court has agreed only about a dozen times in the past century to take a case so quickly and bypass the federal appeals courts, usually involving a national emergency such as nationwide strikes in the steel and coal industries.

“In Friday’s filing, the Justice Department said the court has done so in the past ‘to promptly resolve important and time sensitive disputes,’ but offered only three examples in the past 66 years.”

Not everyone’s excited about Trump’s move. The Human Rights Campaign’s Sarah McBride accused the President of trying to expedite the process “because they know that every day that transgender people continue to enlist and serve with distinction is another day that the courts and the public see this irrational policy for what it is.”

Peter Renn, of Lambda Legal, agreed:

“It seems the Trump administration can’t wait to discriminate. There is no valid reason to jump the line now and seek U.S. Supreme Court review before the appellate courts have even ruled on the preliminary issues before them.”

What do you think? I want to hear from you. Please sound off in the Comments section. AND: Please check out the video below. PLUS: If you appreciate orchestral score, I highly recommend the soundtrack to Schwarzenegger’s Junior. Composed and conducted by the brilliant James Newton Howard, I find it absolutely magnificent (and beautiful — particularly “Main Titles” and “Junior”).

Relevant RedState links in this article: here, here, here, and here.

See 3 more pieces from me: billionaires & communism, Left vs. Left, and Kennedy & Miller on 2020.

Find all my RedState work here.

And please follow Alex Parker on Twitter and Facebook.

Thank you for reading! Please sound off in the Comments section below. For iPhone instructions, see the bottom of this page.

If you have an iPhone and want to comment, select the box with the upward arrow at the bottom of your screen; swipe left and choose “Request Desktop Site.” You may have to do this several times before the page reloads. Scroll down to the red horizontal bar that says “Show Comments.”