LGBT activists using court subpoenas to attack innocent bystanders have put a second organization in their bull’s-eye, with confirmation from the nonpartisan Center for Military Readiness it is facing demands for copies of its emails, correspondence, and more, even though it is not party to the pertinent lawsuit.
Instead of providing the information the LGBT groups demanded, Liberty Counsel filed an objection with the court.
“We will not be bullied or intimidated. This unbelievable invasion of privacy must be exposed and fought, not just for our organization, but to protect the right for anyone to freely communicate with their political or military leaders,” said Mat Staver, chairman of Liberty Counsel.
His organization defends civil rights in court but is not part of the lawsuit, Doe vs. Donald Trump, brought by the GLBTQ Legal Advocate and Defenders and National Center for Lesbian Rights.
Nonetheless, the court sent Liberty Counsel a seven-page demand for records of its communications with the president, the vice president, the office of the president, the Department of Defense and others.
“The subpoena was requested by two of the most aggressive LGBT activists groups,” Liberty Counsel explained.
Further, the organization was given only two weeks to compile the documents.
“This subpoena is one of the most onerous and frivolous Liberty Counsel has ever seen and is intended to intimidate. If it was allowed to stand, then anyone could use a lawsuit to harass other people and groups with whom they disagree. It would also significantly chill the free speech of any future groups in their communication with governmental officials. It is a gross overreach of judicial power to target and subpoena groups for no other reason than that they supported a politician or general’s decision,” Liberty Counsel said.
The LGBT activists who are suing the government for banning gender-confused people from military service.
CMR got similar demands, and now Elaine Donnelly, president, is pointing out, “Under Article II of the U.S. Constitution, President Trump has every right to review and change his predecessor’s policies affecting military personnel who identify as transgender or suffer from gender dysphoria. Four federal district judges have tried to usurp presidential power, ordering the Trump administration to continue Obama-era policies.”
She continued, “LGBT activist lawyers have served three subpoenas on the Center for Military Readiness as a ‘non-party’ in the litigation. They are demanding the right to search through private emails from the first day of the Trump presidential campaign, to the present, and beyond. It appears that they are trying to prove what amounts to a conspiracy theory. In their minds, President Trump did not announce a change in policy for pro-defense reasons. He must have been motivated by personal ‘animus’ against transgenders, not the advice of military leaders. None of this is true.”
She said, “The subpoenas seek to violate our First Amendment rights of free speech, and to punish CMR for engaging in public policy discussions as an independent source of information and analysis. CMR refuses to be intimidated, silenced, or deterred from our mission.
“As we have since our founding 25 years ago, CMR will continue to report on and analyze complex military/social issues. This includes the new policies regarding transgenders in the military which were announced on Friday, March 23. As reported in this article, President Trump approved recommendations he received from Secretary of Defense James Mattis on February 22.”
The CMR noted the basic facts of the argument: Trump’s policy change promotes military readiness, asserts sound priorities, honors previously commitments, allows participation by gender non-conformation individuals “if they meet medical and deployment requirements,” and more.
Interesting, the report points out that 994 service members with gender dysphoria have accouncted for some 30,000 mental health visits in just the past few years.
“CMR is prepared to defend its right to communicate with government officials, without being forced to allow those who oppose CMR’s policy positions to violate our First Amendment rights to speak and to petition government officials on matters of national defense,” the CMR announcement said.
Liberty Counsel said the lawsuit prompting the demand for documents “is retaliation for military policy based on facts with which these individuals and groups disagree.”
“It is an attempt by these radical groups to bully and intimidate this organization. GLAD and NCLR are using subpoena power to deliberately harass pro-faith and pro-family groups like Liberty Counsel, who are not in any way related to the lawsuit.”