I believe he can mandate anything regarding security clearances because as the leader of the executive branch, he controls all aspects of security clearances and classification minus nuclear arsenal and design and Human intelligence sources.
1 Like
Well then, that’s a can of worms. I can see an expansion of the mentality against abortions as well as the anti-trans crusade (which is also liable to play out again the military), etc. Specifically these types of things from Project 2025. I pray the following doesn’t happen…
- Are you LGBTQ? If you’re trans, do you refuse to change your ID back to your “biological sex” or “assigned sex at birth”? Do you still present as your preferred gender (other than your assigned sex at birth)? Are you in a same sex marriage? - Psychological Conditions or Personal Conduct DQ
- Got an abortion previously (and live in a state that bans it or not, perhaps conditionally in either direction)? - Personal Conduct DQ
- Do you watch porn or go to fully legal strip clubs? - Personal Conduct or Psychological Conditions DQ
- Do you support your child who is LGBTQ in their gender identity or sexual orientation, or do you believe in DEI and advocate for it? - Personal Conduct DQ
So are you SURE those kind of changes are possible? As well, good gawd, allowing any of that to DQ someone on a clearance on any of that is absurd and terrifying for our country imho. He already has done similar things for the military in his last term, e.g. the trans ban. However, I’m not sure if something like Bostock v Clayton County would apply for some of the above cases in the civilian cleared world?
So perhaps not saber rattling as was mentioned above, but rather something other than the media mentioned Schedule F threat, attacking certain individuals with a clearance for who they are, how they identify, what they do legally in their spare time, their personal medical history and choices, and what they believe in?
You have Elon, publicly singling out federal workers… What a time to be alive.
flyguy, how about you do some research …here is some help for your next goggle search: " Trump picks Project 2025 co-author Russell Vought to lead budget office"
I think about this every time I take the customers required security training. Trump and many of his appointees couldn’t obtain a TS/SCI clearance and are thought to be actual security risks. It has become a farce but this is what the low information voters want.
1 Like
It is ironic that security clearances were originally developed in an effort to “out” gays and lesbians serving in the government and now we could be headed down the same road. Perhaps the whole of “security clearances” and the process could be abolished altogether. It’s not going to mean very much during the next administration.
This is absolutely not true at all.
Security clearances were not created to “out gays and lesbians” and simple research would show you this.
Stop fear mongering and pushing an agenda when you know this is not even remotely close to the reason they were created.
1 Like
I always understood that modern clearances started as an effort to protect nuclear secrets from Soviet spies.
That said, Gays did have a hard time getting clearances until I think 1992. But pretty sure that was not the the main reason behind the clearance process.
1 Like
The clearance system evolved for a variety reasons but most certainly they came about to determine if candidates could prove they had the good character and sound judgment to gain a security clearance ay any level. I think we can all agree that in the last several hundred years being homosexual automatically disqualified you as someone without the “good character” required to serve your country. Lots of historical documentation regarding that. But, of course there were many other disqualifiers. I’m sure women (if they were even eligible) who were divorced or ever admitted they had an extramarital affair were disqualified as well. Probably Blacks, Asians, and Hispanics too.
Created to weed out those without “good character” and the definition has changed and evolved. How do you define good character?
Keep in mind the process is also set up to determine if an individual could be blackmailed. So yea, a few decades ago anyone who was not a heterosexual could, in theory, be blackmailed. Same with extramarital affairs. Society has changed (evolved??) and the clearance process has changed along with it.
2 Likes
I’m bumping this thread. The silence over the past few days is deafening. It needs discussion and awareness.
I will ask again.
Do you all think it is likely that Trump will modify the Adjudicative Guidelines, SEAD4, and other policies to boot trans folks out of civilian federal service or cleared jobs at this point?
The language in the recent EO re: transgender members of the military is abhorrent, and basically calls trans people subhuman and dishonest, which are terms that are commonly used to justify clearance denials…
“
Beyond the hormonal and surgical medical interventions involved, adoption of a gender identity inconsistent with an individual’s sex conflicts with a soldier’s commitment to an honorable, truthful, and disciplined lifestyle, even in one’s personal life. A man’s assertion that he is a woman, and his requirement that others honor this falsehood, is not consistent with the humility and selflessness required of a service member.
“
Unf, I don’t think you will get an answer here because no one knows what this POTUS is going to do, including this POTUS.
3 Likes
There is still time to delete this trash
My opinion is anything goes and anything is possible. We’ve never had a President with multiple security violations who probably could not obtain a security clearance on his own independently. The election gave him his security clearance and the ability to modify the process to the “religious” whims of his supporters.
2 Likes
My opinion is anything goes and anything is possible. We’ve never had a President with multiple security violations who probably could not obtain a security clearance on his own independently. The election gave him his security clearance and the ability to modify the process to the “religious” whims of his supporters. It all feels like we are moving back in time to 1955. 
The wording from the recent “resignation email” sent out by OPM does not apply to military but it does have some foreshadowing in the wording that might give you an idea of the future. Here it is verbatim:
Enhanced standards of conduct: The federal workforce should be comprised of employees who are reliable, loyal, trustworthy, and who strive for excellence in their daily work. Employees will be subject to enhanced standards of suitability and conduct as we move forward. Employees who engage in unlawful behavior or other misconduct will be prioritized for appropriate investigation and discipline, including termination.