(RNS) — The Trump Justice Department has filed a formal complaint against a federal judge for asking one of its lawyers how Jesus would have reacted to a policy allowing discrimination against a disfavored group. According to the Department of Justice, such questioning of the attorney “regarding his religious beliefs and then using him unwillingly as a physical prop in her courtroom theatrics” constituted judicial misconduct.
Here’s the story.
Last week, on the second day of a hearing on the lawsuit challenging President Trump’s executive order banning transgender personnel from serving in the military, U.S. District Judge Ana C. Reyes rattled off a list of 11 anti-trans actions taken by the administration in its first three weeks, from an executive order recognizing the existence of only two sexes to revocation of a regulation ensuring that trans people have equal access to homeless shelters.
She then brought up an email she had received that morning, which said, “Hello. I would like to share with you how you can have a relationship with Jesus Christ and go to heaven. In love.”
The email seems to have been prompted by Reyes’ sharp criticism of the executive order on the hearing’s first day, which had been reported in the media. At one point Reyes had been quoted as saying, “It calls an entire category of people dishonest, dishonorable, undisciplined, immodest, who lack integrity.” She had also told the lawyers present: “We’re dealing with unadulterated animus.”
The email went on to refer her to the King James Bible, “which I don’t need,” she said, “because I have it in my chambers, but I appreciate the reference.” She then poses the situation imagined by the emailer as a hypothetical, and pops her question to the DOJ attorney, Jason Lynch.
Now, that email assumes that I don’t have a relationship with Jesus already. But let’s assume that I don’t, and I want to know what Jesus would think about something because I want to have a closer relationship with him, as I’ve been told to do.
What do you think Jesus would say to telling a group of people that they are so worthless, 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”?
Lynch responds, “Well, I’ll create another sound bite for the coverage. The United States is not going to speculate about what Jesus would have to say about anything. I’m sorry. I mean — your Honor, I’m sorry —
Whereupon the judge says, “I know. It’s an impossible question. I get it. It’s an unfair question to you. But you can’t tell me that transgender people are not being discriminated against today.”
It’s hard to see how this exchange shows Reyes using Lynch improperly as a “physical prop,” much less asking him about his religious beliefs. The attorney seems to take her questioning in good humor, and begs out of answering in a way she finds perfectly acceptable. Indeed, I’d say the judge backed off a bit quickly in calling her question “impossible.”
It is not impossible to come to a reasonable assessment about what Jesus might say or do in a given contemporary situation, based on what the New Testament says he said and did. And you don’t have to be a believing Christian to do so.
Jesus would probably not have said “WTF” or its Aramaic equivalent, for example, inasmuch as he’s never quoted using expletives — although, to be sure, he did not hesitate to call out some people as hypocrites, vipers and whited sepulchers, “which,” according to the King James Version, “indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men’s bones, and of all uncleanness.”
As for how Jesus would have regarded trans people, that would seem to be more along the lines of the judge’s second hypothetical quote. Here, for example, is how ChatGPT begins its non-believing response to a WWJD question regarding trans people:
Jesus’ teachings, as recorded in the Gospels, emphasize love, compassion, and acceptance for all people, particularly those who are marginalized or excluded by society. While there is no direct mention of transgender individuals in the Bible, Jesus consistently reached out to those whom others rejected, including sinners, the poor, the sick, women, and people on the margins.
For his part, attorney Lynch could have answered, “I’m prepared to stipulate that Jesus would have told the shelter to let them in but as a matter of U.S. law, whatever Jesus would have said is irrelevant.”
I imagine, however, that there are folks in the Trump Justice Department who would have disapproved of that remark.