Trump's policies are fueling cruelty, purging transgender existence from America - NJTODAY.NET
njtoday.news -- Sunday, August 17, 2025, 12:57:23 PM Eastern Daylight Time
Categories: Presidential Campaigns, State Politics & Governors, Supreme Court & Judicial Appointments
Amid the troops, tanks, and rifles deployed against civilians on America's city streets, the Trump administration's true cruelty lies in the quiet violence of policy papers and court filings -- with the cold, bureaucratic language of exclusion.
The case of Lillian Bernier, a machinist in New Hampshire, is not merely about health insurance. It is about whether America will finally recognize the humanity of those it has always refused to see.
Turbocam, Inc., a manufacturer of aerospace components, operates under a corporate mission statement that reads like a Puritan sermon: "We exist as a business for the purpose of honoring God."
When Lillian, a transgender woman, sought insurance coverage for hormone therapy and gender-affirming surgery -- treatments her doctors deemed medically necessary -- the company refused. Their reasoning? God's law trumps federal law.
Bernier isn't asking for special treatment. She's demanding what her coworkers already have: equal benefits for equal work.
While Turbocam offers her a "cash bonus" to seek outside coverage -- a pittance compared to the cost of transition-related care -- the company's lawyers argue that accommodating her would "violate their Christian values."
In denying Turbocam's motion to dismiss the lawsuit last year, U.S. District Court Chief Judge Landya B. McCafferty rejected the company's argument that it did not violate federal employment law prohibiting discrimination against transgender people, on the grounds that Turbocam ignored the Supreme Court's Bostock v. Clayton County ruling that employment discrimination based on an individual's transgender identity violates Title VII, as well as cases relying on Bostock to specifically hold that categorical exclusions of gender transition medical care violate Title VII.
The Trump administration, in its latest act of moral arson, has filed a legal brief siding with Lillian's employer, Turbocam, a company that claims to operate under "God's law" while depositing payments from government contracts and denying one of its workers the medical care her doctors say she needs.
The DOJ agrees, effectively endorsing a two-tiered system where religious employers can opt out of civil rights laws.
Turbocam produces 10 core stage main engine turbomachinery components for the RS-25 main engine on NASA's SLS (Space Launch System) heavy lift exploration rocket.
While the exact value of these turbomachinery components remains undisclosed, the company profits handsomely from its government contracts -- yet refuses to comply with the law.
The Justice Department argues, with a straight face, that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) allows businesses to strip transgender employees of their rights -- that faith is not a refuge but a weapon, not a light but a torch to burn down the already fragile protections of the marginalized.
Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon, a far-right legal mercenary best known for defending January 6 rioters, framed the DOJ's intervention as a defense of "religious liberty."
But this is no principled stand -- it's a blueprint for systemic exclusion. By asserting that RFRA overrides anti-discrimination statutes, the administration is greenlighting a new Jim Crow for LGBTQ+ people
This is not new. America has always been a country of hierarchies, of sacred and profane, of those who matter and those who do not. The bodies of Black people, of women, of queer and trans folk, have always been battlegrounds where the powerful assert their right to define, to control, to erase.
What is different now is the shamelessness, the way the government itself has become an architect of this violence, dressing it up in the language of "religious liberty" while gutting the very laws meant to shield the vulnerable.
Lillian is not asking for charity. She is demanding what is hers -- what any worker deserves: to be treated as a full human being, to have her labor valued equally, to have her pain acknowledged as real.
But in this America, her body is a debate, her existence a controversy. The same forces that once argued segregation was a "states' rights" issue now insist that discrimination is a "religious freedom" issue. The language changes, but the song remains the same: You do not belong here.
Think of the Black mothers who watched their children die because hospitals would not treat them. Think of the gay men left to wither during the AIDS crisis because Reagan's government saw their suffering as divine justice.
It suddenly becomes understandable why now, as transgender Americans are told their lives are expendable, their healthcare is a "choice," their dignity negotiable: The cruelty is not incidental; it is the point.
The DOJ is effectively endorsing a two-tiered system where religious employers can opt out of civil rights laws.
In 2024 alone, 1,950 hate crimes targeted LGBTQ+ Americans, with transgender women -- particularly Black trans women -- bearing the brunt of violence. The Trump administration's rhetoric and policies are fueling this fire, painting transgender existence as a moral contagion to be purged from public life.
The law, in better moments, has been a tool of liberation.
The Civil Rights Act, the ADA, Bostock vs. Clayton County, Georgia -- these were cracks in the fortress, brief acknowledgments that the despised and the excluded might also be citizens.
But the Trump administration is not interested in justice. It is interested in power -- in who gets to decide who is human.
This case is not an outlier -- it's a battlefield in Trump's broader war on LGBTQ+ rights, a campaign that since 2025 has banned transgender troops from serving openly, rolled back Title IX protections for trans students, and directed federal prisons to house transgender inmates by birth sex, exposing them to rampant abuse -- each cruel policy wrapped in the hollow sanctimony of 'religious freedom' while advancing its unmistakable goal: the erasure of transgender people from public life.
Lillian's fight is not hers alone. It is the fight of every person who has ever been told they are too much or not enough, too loud or too invisible. It is the fight of a country against its own soul.
America has always been a paradox -- a nation built on both freedom and chains, on both equality and exclusion. The question is not whether we will live up to our ideals, but whether we will even remember what they were.
Lillian Bernier remembers. And so must we.
By legitimizing discrimination under RFRA, the Trump administration has sent a message to every employer, landlord, and healthcare provider: Transgender lives are negotiable.
Lillian Bernier's fight is about more than insurance coverage. It's about whether the U.S. government will uphold its founding promise -- equal protection under the law -- or surrender to a regime where your rights depend on your boss's interpretation of Scripture.
The verdict will determine whose America this is: one of pluralism and equality, or one where faith becomes a cudgel against the marginalized.
Sign Our PetitionIn recent years, the legal landscape surrounding LGBTQ+ rights has undergone significant shifts, reflecting a broader societal struggle for recognition and equality. The case of Lillian Bernier, a transgender woman denied critical health care benefits by her employer, Turbocam, Inc., encapsulates the ongoing tension between civil rights and religious exemptions. This situation highlights a critical juncture in American history, where the policies of the Trump administration have exacerbated a climate of exclusion and discrimination, particularly against marginalized communities. The refusal to provide necessary medical coverage not only threatens the health and dignity of individuals like Bernier but also raises essential questions about the intersection of corporate practices, personal rights, and religious liberties.
Historically, the struggle for transgender rights in the United States has been fraught with challenges. From the Stonewall riots in 1969 to the recent advancements in legal protections, the journey toward equality has been marked by both progress and backlash. The Bostock v. Clayton County ruling in 2020 was a significant victory, affirming that discrimination based on gender identity falls under the protections of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. However, as the current case illustrates, this victory is tenuous and requires constant vigilance. The Trump administration’s alignment with corporate interests that invoke religious beliefs to justify discrimination underscores a disturbing trend: the weaponization of faith to undermine civil rights protections for vulnerable populations.
The actions of Turbocam, which operates under a corporate mission that ostensibly honors God, reveal the hypocrisy of using religious values as a shield against accountability. By prioritizing a selective interpretation of faith over federal employment laws, Turbocam not only undermines the legal framework designed to protect employees but also perpetuates a culture of exclusion. This scenario is emblematic of broader societal challenges where religious freedom is often misused to justify discrimination against those who do not conform to traditional norms. It raises a crucial point: can a corporation truly claim to uphold moral values while simultaneously denying an employee the right to necessary medical care?
The support of the Department of Justice for Turbocam in this case reflects a dangerous shift in policy that prioritizes corporate power over individual rights. By endorsing a two-tiered system that allows businesses to discriminate under the guise of religious freedom, the Trump administration has set a precedent that could have far-reaching implications for all marginalized communities. This legal brief is not merely a technical disagreement; it is a fundamental assault on the hard-won rights of transgender individuals, threatening to roll back decades of progress in civil rights. The implications of such a stance are profound—if corporations can exempt themselves from adhering to civil rights laws, the very foundation of workplace equality is at risk.
Lillian Bernier’s case is a call to action for advocates of social justice, illuminating the urgent need for a collective response to these encroachments on human rights. The struggle for transgender rights is not isolated; it intersects with broader movements for LGBTQ+ equality, women's rights, and workers' rights. As the fight for a more equitable society continues, it is essential to draw connections between individual cases of discrimination and the larger systemic issues at play. Advocacy must extend beyond legal battles; it must engage in the cultural narrative that shapes public perception of transgender individuals. Education, empathy, and solidarity are vital in dismantling the prejudices that fuel such discriminatory practices.
In conclusion, the case of Lillian Bernier serves as a poignant reminder of the ongoing struggles faced by transgender individuals in a society that often prioritizes corporate interests over human dignity. It urges us to critically examine the implications of religious exemptions in the workplace and the broader societal narratives that enable discrimination. As we navigate these complex issues, it is imperative to advocate for comprehensive policies that protect all individuals, regardless of gender identity. By standing in solidarity with those like Bernier, we reaffirm our commitment to justice, equality, and the recognition of every person's inherent humanity.
The recent developments surrounding the case of Lillian Bernier and Turbocam, Inc. illuminate a troubling trend in contemporary American policy—a trend characterized by the intersection of corporate interests, religious exemptions, and the erosion of civil rights for marginalized communities, particularly transgender individuals. This case is not just a legal battle; it is emblematic of a broader ideological struggle that pits the rights and dignity of individuals against the so-called "religious freedoms" of businesses. The ramifications of this case extend beyond the courtroom, as they reflect a systemic issue that has gained momentum under the previous administration and continues to reverberate through various sectors of society.
Historically, the tension between individual rights and religious liberties has been a contentious issue in the United States. The Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) was enacted in 1993 to protect individuals from government actions that substantially burden their exercise of religion. However, in recent years, this well-intentioned legislation has been weaponized by corporations seeking to justify discriminatory practices against employees. The Trump administration's alignment with Turbocam's position indicates a troubling shift towards legitimizing discrimination under the guise of religious belief—a move that fundamentally undermines the progress made by civil rights movements over the past few decades. The Bostock v. Clayton County ruling was a significant victory for LGBTQ rights, affirming that discrimination based on gender identity violates Title VII. Yet, the current political climate signals a possible rollback of these hard-won protections, as seen in the administration's support for companies like Turbocam.
In analyzing the implications of this case, it is crucial to recognize the broader context in which such corporate practices operate. The intersection of systemic inequality and corporate power manifests in the refusal of companies to provide essential health care benefits to transgender employees, despite the medical necessity of such care. By denying Lillian Bernier coverage for hormone therapy and gender-affirming surgery, Turbocam not only violates federal law but also perpetuates a culture of exclusion that reinforces the marginalization of transgender individuals. The legal arguments laid out by the Department of Justice echo a disturbing trend wherein corporate entities exploit their religious beliefs to sidestep accountability, creating a two-tiered system of rights that privileges certain beliefs over the fundamental rights of others.
As engaged citizens, we must confront this reality with urgency and intention. The first step is to advocate for robust policies that protect the rights of all individuals, regardless of their gender identity. This includes supporting legislation that expressly prohibits discrimination in health care based on gender identity and ensuring that the protections afforded by the Bostock ruling are upheld in all instances. Additionally, public awareness campaigns to educate the community on the rights of transgender individuals can foster a culture of empathy and understanding, countering the narratives that seek to dehumanize marginalized groups. Engaging with local representatives to express dissent against policies that enable discrimination and demanding accountability from corporations that disregard federal law is essential to fostering a more equitable society.
Moreover, fostering solidarity among different marginalized communities is crucial in the fight against these discriminatory practices. By forming coalitions that unite various social justice movements—be it for racial equality, LGBTQ rights, or economic justice—we can amplify our voices and strengthen our collective impact. This intersectional approach not only highlights the interconnectedness of these struggles but also creates a formidable front against policies designed to uphold systemic inequalities. It is vital to recognize that the fight for justice is not a zero-sum game; the liberation of one group ultimately contributes to the liberation of all.
In conclusion, the case of Lillian Bernier versus Turbocam, Inc. serves as a stark reminder of the ongoing battle for equality and dignity in the face of institutionalized discrimination. It challenges us to reconsider the meaning of freedom in our society—whether it is a freedom that upholds the rights of the few at the expense of the many or one that champions the inherent worth of every individual. As we navigate this complex landscape, our commitment to advocacy, education, and solidarity will be pivotal in ensuring that the principles of justice and equality are not just aspirations but lived realities for all Americans.
In light of the troubling policies and actions described in the article, there are several concrete steps we can take to advocate for the rights of transgender individuals and push back against discriminatory practices. Here’s a detailed list of actions that can be taken:
### Personal Actions
1. **Educate Yourself and Others**: - Read up on transgender rights and the legal landscape regarding employment discrimination. Share this knowledge with friends and family to raise awareness.
2. **Support Local LGBTQ+ Organizations**: - Volunteer your time or donate to organizations that support transgender rights. Local advocacy groups often need assistance with outreach, fundraising, and community events.
3. **Engage in Conversations**: - Use social media platforms to share information and personal stories that highlight the importance of equality and the struggles faced by transgender individuals.
### Advocacy Actions
1. **Sign and Share Petitions**: - **Petition for Transgender Rights**: Sign petitions on platforms like Change.org or MoveOn.org that advocate for the protection of transgender rights in employment and healthcare. - Example Petition: “Protect Transgender Rights in the Workplace” – Search for relevant petitions and share them on social media.
2. **Contact Elected Officials**: - Write letters or emails to your congressional representatives urging them to support legislation that protects transgender rights. Here’s a template for your message:
**Subject**: Support Transgender Rights and Protections
Dear [Representative's Name],
I am writing to express my deep concern regarding the ongoing discrimination against transgender individuals in our nation, particularly in the workplace and healthcare systems. The recent case involving Lillian Bernier at Turbocam highlights the urgent need for comprehensive protections for transgender employees.
I urge you to support legislation that enshrines the rights of transgender individuals and ensures that they receive equal benefits and treatment under the law.
Thank you for your attention to this critical issue.
Sincerely, [Your Name] [Your Address, City, State, Zip Code] [Your Email Address]
- **Contact Information**: - Find your representatives' contact details on [congress.gov](https://www.congress.gov/members/find-your-representative) or [govtrack.us](https://www.govtrack.us/). - Example: - Senator Alex Padilla (CA) - Email: [padilla.senate.gov/contact](https://www.padilla.senate.gov/contact/) - Representative Ilhan Omar (MN-05) - Email: [omar.house.gov/contact](https://omar.house.gov/contact)
3. **Participate in Protests and Rallies**: - Attend local events, rallies, or marches that support LGBTQ+ rights. Look for events on social media or community boards.
4. **Engage with Corporate Accountability**: - Write to Turbocam and other companies that discriminate against transgender employees, urging them to adopt inclusive policies. - **Contact Turbocam**: - Email: [info@turbocam.com](mailto:info@turbocam.com) - Address: Turbocam, Inc., 3 East Industrial Park Drive, Londonderry, NH 03053.
**Sample Message**: "I am reaching out to express my disappointment with Turbocam's refusal to provide equal healthcare benefits to your employee, Lillian Bernier. I urge you to reconsider your policies and ensure that all employees receive the necessary healthcare support without discrimination."
5. **Support Legislation at the State Level**: - Research local laws and legislative efforts regarding transgender rights in your state. Contact your state legislators to express support for bills that protect transgender individuals from discrimination.
6. **Promote Inclusive Work Environments**: - If you are in a position of influence at your workplace, advocate for policies that support diversity and inclusion, including specific measures for transgender employees.
### Conclusion
By taking these actions, we can contribute to a broader movement that advocates for equality and justice for transgender individuals. It is crucial to remain vigilant and proactive in the face of discriminatory policies, ensuring that we stand in solidarity with those who are marginalized and fight for a more inclusive society.