on december 6, usdoj filed for a partial stay of the order of november 27 requiring accessions to start on january 1, 2018, including a statement from lernes j. herbert, acting deputy assistant secretary of defense, military personnel policy, in which he argued that "transgender applicants may not receive the appropriate medical and administrative accession screening necessary for someone with a complex medical condition. as a result, an applicant may be accessed for military service who is not physically or psychologically equipped to engage in combat/operational service." in the accompanying memorandum of points and authorities, usdoj also argued the military was not given "the appropriate level of deference" while studying the service of transgender troops, and that secretary mattis retained "independent authority to extend the effective date of the new accessions policy" as that authority had not been challenged in the original complaint. in opposition, plaintiffs filed a motion on december 8, noting that preparations for accession of transgender candidates were largely complete by july 1, 2017, and an additional six months had been added. the memorandum added "the government offers no explanation why a ban on accession by transgender people would be any less unconstitutional if it were imposed by the secretary [of defense] based on his own initiative rather than at the direction of the president."