Discrimination Plagues National Guard Despite Claims of Progress
A troubling pattern of discrimination within the National Guard has emerged, contradicting claims of inclusivity and raising serious questions about the military’s commitment to equality. Documents obtained through the Freedom of Information Act and newly filed lawsuits paint a disturbing picture of racial, sexual, and LGBTQ+ discrimination experienced by service members across the country.
These incidents, ranging from blatant racial slurs to systemic denial of promotions, cast a shadow over the National Guard, an organization that prides itself on serving as a microcosm of American society. The revelations come at a particularly sensitive time, as Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has openly expressed skepticism towards diversity initiatives, claiming that "our diversity is our strength" is the "single dumbest phrase in military history."
Hegseth’s appointment and rhetoric have fueled concerns among many service members and veterans, particularly those from underrepresented groups. His actions, such as the firing of Air Force Gen. CQ Brown, a Black officer, and the abrupt resignation of the Black head of the Pentagon’s health care system, have been interpreted by some as indicative of a broader effort to marginalize minority voices within the military.
Retired Army Maj. Gen. Dana Pittard, who is also Black, voiced his concerns, stating, "It gives the impression that unless you’re a white male in this administration, you’re thought of less than. That’s a terrible signal to send to the U.S. military and the American people."
The National Guard documents, encompassing over 330 pages of investigative memos related to 35 discrimination complaints from 2015 to 2022, detail a range of egregious incidents. One particularly disturbing case involved a Black Guardsman in Maryland who was forced to wear a heavy chain as a form of punishment, a practice that a National Guard Bureau investigator deemed "the most humiliating punishment imaginable to use against an African American soldier."
In another instance, a Black soldier in Michigan reported being referred to as a "coon" by his superiors. Meanwhile, in Maryland, a Black soldier was consistently passed over for promotions in favor of his white counterparts. A gay soldier in Idaho faced discrimination when his commander labeled gay marriage "immoral" and transgender people "sexual deviants."
What is particularly alarming is that approximately half of the claims documented in these records were substantiated by top-level investigators, leading to reprimands, firings, and bars from re-enlistment. Eugene Fidell, a military justice expert at Yale Law School, emphasized the significance of this finding, stating, "That half the complaints were found to be substantiated is remarkable, in my experience. That .500 batting average alone tells me there’s a real problem."
The National Guard Bureau, while declining to comment on the specific lawsuit due to ongoing litigation, maintains that it takes all allegations of discrimination seriously. However, the documents and interviews with affected service members reveal a frustratingly slow and often ineffective complaint process.
The complex and bureaucratic nature of the complaint system discourages many soldiers from pursuing their cases, with some giving up after years of waiting. Bruce Weaver, the Black sergeant forced to wear a chain, described the process as a "slaughterhouse," where soldiers are "kept going from one stage to another before you run out of time."
Even when discrimination is substantiated, the consequences are not always adequate. In Weaver’s case, the officer who discriminated against him was promoted despite the findings against him, and his actions were not documented in his performance reviews.
The case of George Ross, a retired Chief Warrant Officer 3 and Iraq War veteran, further illustrates the challenges faced by Black service members seeking fair treatment within the National Guard. Ross, an expert in IT and cybersecurity, was repeatedly rejected for positions on the Maryland National Guard’s new cybersecurity team, despite his qualifications and positive performance reviews.
After filing a complaint with the state of Maryland, Ross’s case languished for nine months before being dismissed. He subsequently appealed to the National Guard Bureau, which conducted its own investigation and found evidence of racial discrimination and a hostile workplace.
While Ross eventually received a settlement that included backpay and lawyer’s fees, he expressed disappointment that the systemic issues within the National Guard persisted. "I was hoping that it would help change the way things are conducted," he said, "But it’s the same old, same old."
In addition to racial discrimination, the documents also highlight instances of discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender. The case of the gay soldier in Idaho, who faced discrimination from his commander due to his beliefs about LGBT individuals, underscores the challenges faced by LGBTQ+ service members within the National Guard.
In another instance, a female physician’s assistant in Kentucky’s Air National Guard successfully proved that she was discriminated against and sexually harassed by a superior who denied her advancement opportunities after she rejected his advances.
These incidents paint a stark picture of the discrimination that continues to plague the National Guard, despite the military’s stated commitment to diversity and inclusion. The slow and often ineffective complaint process, coupled with instances of inadequate consequences for perpetrators, further exacerbates the problem.
As Defense Secretary Hegseth pursues his mission to eradicate "woke" sensitivities in the military, it is crucial that the National Guard and the Department of Defense take concrete steps to address the systemic issues that contribute to discrimination within the ranks. This includes streamlining the complaint process, ensuring that perpetrators are held accountable for their actions, and fostering a culture of respect and inclusivity for all service members, regardless of their race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, or gender identity. Failure to do so will not only undermine the morale and readiness of the National Guard but also erode public trust in the military’s commitment to equality and justice.
