WASHINGTON — On Tuesday, a group comprised of six active-duty transgender service members and two former members eager to re-enlist initiated the first legal challenge against President Donald Trump’s recent executive order that seeks to modify military policy regarding transgender individuals. This order is perceived as a move that could potentially lead to a ban on transgender individuals serving in the U.S. armed forces.
In the executive order signed on Monday, Trump asserted that the sexual identity of transgender troops “conflicts with a soldier’s commitment to an honorable, truthful, and disciplined lifestyle,” further claiming that it poses risks to military readiness. The directive mandates Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to develop a new policy regarding transgender service members.
Army Captain Gordon Herrero, who is one of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit, emphasized in a statement that being transgender does not diminish one’s capabilities as a soldier. “There’s nothing about being transgender that makes me better or worse than any other soldier I serve alongside. We are all here because we are committed to our country, and we are passionate, willing, and able to serve effectively,” Herrero stated.
Among the plaintiffs are an honored Sailor of the Year, a recipient of the Bronze Star, and several members who have earned meritorious service medals. Army Sgt. 1st Class Kate Cole, who has dedicated over half her life to military service including combat deployments in Afghanistan, expressed concern over the potential negative consequences of removing qualified transgender soldiers. “Removing qualified transgender soldiers like me means an exodus of experienced personnel,” Cole remarked.
The legal action is being represented by the same team that fought against Trump’s earlier ban on transgender service members during his initial administration, a ban that the Supreme Court upheld despite ongoing legal challenges. When Joe Biden assumed office, he overturned the previous ban.
This new lawsuit contests the executive order on equal protection grounds, arguing that it exhibits hostility towards a particular group of individuals. “The law is very clear that the government can’t base policies on disapproval of particular groups of people,” stated Shannon Minter, legal director at the National Center for Lesbian Rights (NCLR). “That’s animus. And animus-based laws are presumed to be invalid and unconstitutional.”
The lawsuit, which NCLR and GLAD Law filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, aims to protect the rights of transgender service members. Sasha Buchert, legal counsel for Lambda Legal, announced that her organization, in partnership with the Human Rights Campaign, also plans to present a legal challenge against the order.
Regarding the executive order, the Pentagon has refrained from commenting on the ongoing litigation but has stated that it will carry out all directives from the President’s executive orders with the utmost professionalism and in alignment with national security goals.
While there is no official estimate of the number of transgender individuals currently serving in the military, some experts approximate that this figure could be in the thousands. Unlike Trump’s earlier 2017 ban, which primarily affected future recruits, the new executive order could also impact existing service members, according to Minter.
