In Washington, a federal judge announced her intention to decide next week on whether to prevent the Trump administration from enforcing a prohibition against transgender individuals serving in the U.S. military. The announcement was made following a comprehensive hearing in Washington, D.C., during which U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes expressed a “strong hope” to issue a ruling by Tuesday or Wednesday. She acknowledged that her decision might not conclude the matter, indicating that an appeal seems almost inevitable.
Judge Reyes dedicated much of the hearing to interrogating a government lawyer about a new policy from the Defense Department. This policy typically disqualifies those diagnosed with gender dysphoria from military service. Gender dysphoria involves distress due to a disparity between one’s assigned gender and gender identity and is associated with heightened risks of depression and suicidal thoughts.
The policy was prompted by President Donald Trump’s executive order on January 27, which argues that transgender service members’ sexual identities pose a potential conflict with the military’s expectation of maintaining an honorable, truthful, and disciplined lifestyle, extending to personal conduct.
Approximately 2,000 transgender individuals serve in the U.S. military, representing less than 1% of the overall active-duty force. Throughout the hearing, Judge Reyes frequently questioned the administration’s reasoning behind the ban, challenging Justice Department attorney Jason Manion to justify the order and new policy. She likened it to the bygone “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy, which previously restricted LGBTQ individuals’ military service.
“They essentially have to conceal their identities while serving,” Reyes remarked about the transgender troops. Reyes additionally pointed out the Defense Department’s financial expenditure on medical care for treating gender dysphoria, roughly $5.2 million annually over the past decade, which she labeled negligible compared to the military’s multi-billion-dollar budget. She contrasted this with the $42 million per year spent on erectile dysfunction medications.
“It’s not even a rounding error, right?” she queried. Manion responded, suggesting that the cost per service member still bears significance.
The plaintiffs pursuing the blockade of Trump’s order include prominent military figures such as an Army Reserves platoon leader from Pennsylvania, an Army major decorated with a Bronze Star for service in Afghanistan, and a Navy Sailor of the Year award recipient. Their legal representatives argue that Trump’s order breaches transgender individuals’ Fifth Amendment rights to equal protection.
Conversely, government attorneys assert that military officials possess extensive discretion regarding the appointment and deployment of servicemembers, maintaining such decisions should proceed without judicial intervention.
