Federal Court Halts Trump’s Transgender Military Ban \ Newslooks \ Washington DC \ Mary Sidiqi \ Evening Edition \ A federal judge blocked President Donald Trump’s executive order banning transgender people from military service. Judge Ana Reyes ruled the order likely violates constitutional equal protection rights. The ruling preserves the rights of transgender troops as legal battles continue.
Judge Blocks Trump’s Ban on Transgender Troops — Quick Looks
- U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes blocked Trump’s transgender military service ban.
- The order likely violates equal protection rights under the Fifth Amendment.
- The ruling follows growing judicial pushback against Trump’s executive actions.
- Reyes delayed enforcement of her order until Friday to allow appeals.
- Army Reserves 2nd Lt. Nicolas Talbott expressed relief at the ruling.
- Trump’s executive order claimed transgender identity conflicted with military readiness.
- Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s policy disqualified those with gender dysphoria.
- Thousands of transgender people currently serve in the U.S. military.
- Biden reversed Trump’s previous transgender military ban in 2021.
- Plaintiffs’ lawyers say the ban undermines unit cohesion and military strength.
Deep Look
In a major legal setback for President Donald Trump’s efforts to reshape military policy, U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes blocked enforcement of his executive order banning transgender individuals from serving in the military. Issued Tuesday in Washington, D.C., Reyes’ decision marks yet another judicial challenge to Trump’s broader agenda and reinforces the judiciary’s role in safeguarding constitutional rights.
Reyes, appointed by President Joe Biden, ruled that Trump’s directive to exclude transgender troops likely violates their constitutional rights to equal protection under the Fifth Amendment. In her written decision, she acknowledged the potential public debate the ruling would spark, stating, “We should all agree, however, that every person who has answered the call to serve deserves our gratitude and respect.”
The judge’s order is set to take effect Friday morning, giving the Trump administration time to appeal. Her decision came just hours after Trump called for the impeachment of another federal judge who had temporarily blocked deportation flights — a rare public conflict that prompted an unprecedented rebuke from Chief Justice John Roberts.
The case was brought by 14 transgender servicemembers, including Army Reserves 2nd Lt. Nicolas Talbott, who described the ruling as a “sigh of relief.” Talbott, 31, of Akron, Ohio, enlisted as an openly transgender soldier after a nine-year battle to serve. “This is my dream job,” he said. “I was so terrified that I was about to lose it.”
The Trump administration’s executive order, signed on January 27, asserted that the sexual identity of transgender service members conflicted with military discipline and readiness. It claimed that gender dysphoria — a condition where a person’s gender identity doesn’t match their assigned gender — was incompatible with military service. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth issued a policy disqualifying applicants with gender dysphoria, arguing it undermined the mental and physical standards required for military service.
In contrast, plaintiffs’ attorneys from the National Center for Lesbian Rights and GLAD Law argued that the ban was discriminatory, reversing previous policies that allowed transgender individuals to serve openly. “This is a stark and reckless reversal of policy that denigrates honorable transgender servicemembers, disrupts unit cohesion, and weakens our military,” they wrote.
Judge Reyes expressed caution in issuing the injunction, acknowledging the risks of judicial overreach but affirming the judiciary’s responsibility to ensure constitutional protections. “The cruel irony is that thousands of transgender servicemembers have sacrificed — some risking their lives — to ensure for others the very equal protection rights the military ban seeks to deny them,” she wrote.
Government lawyers defended the administration’s actions, arguing that the Department of Defense has broad discretion to determine eligibility for service and historically disqualifies individuals with certain physical or emotional impairments. They claimed that, outside of the transgender context, such decisions would rarely face judicial scrutiny.
The ruling also highlights broader legal challenges facing Trump’s policies on transgender issues. Federal judges in Seattle and Baltimore recently blocked Trump’s executive orders halting federal support for gender-affirming care for transgender youth. Another judge stopped prison officials from transferring three incarcerated transgender women to male facilities, where they would have lost access to hormone therapy.
Trump’s administration has also introduced new rules restricting how schools can teach gender topics and aimed to ban transgender athletes from competing in girls’ and women’s sports. Plaintiffs’ attorneys argued that this pattern represents a systematic effort to strip protections from transgender individuals across housing, healthcare, employment, education, and even international travel.
The military ban was a reversal of a 2016 Department of Defense policy that permitted transgender people to serve openly. While the Supreme Court allowed Trump’s ban to take effect during his first term, Biden rescinded it after taking office, restoring the right for transgender individuals to enlist and serve.
Among the plaintiffs are distinguished military members, including an Army major awarded a Bronze Star for service in Afghanistan and a Navy Sailor of the Year. These individuals, along with others, highlighted their commitment to military service and expressed frustration at policies targeting them based on gender identity rather than performance.
Stephen Miller, Trump’s deputy chief of staff, reacted to the ruling on social media, writing: “District court judges have now decided they are in command of the Armed Forces… is there no end to this madness?”
While the White House did not immediately respond to the ruling, the case is expected to move forward with appeals. In the meantime, thousands of transgender servicemembers remain in uniform, continuing their mission while legal battles over their right to serve play out in court.
For Talbott and others like him, the ruling is a victory — but not the final one. “Now I can go back to focusing on what’s really important, which is the mission,” said Talbott, who leads a military policing unit. His fellow soldiers, he added, “will be pretty excited that I get to stay.”
Federal Court Halts Federal Court Halts
You must Register or Login to post a comment.