WASHINGTON – A federal judge has thrown a significant legal challenge to former President Donald Trump’s executive order banning transgender individuals from serving in the military, a notable move amidst a succession of legal obstacles encountered by his administration.
U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes, based in Washington, D.C., asserted that Trump’s directive likely infringes on the constitutional rights of transgender individuals within the military. This ruling marked the second judicial rebuke against the administration on the same day. Both decisions emerged amidst a contentious atmosphere, as Trump urged the impeachment of another judge who temporarily blocked deportation flights, prompting an uncommon response from Chief Justice John Roberts.
Nominated by President Joe Biden, Judge Reyes postponed her order until the upcoming Friday morning to provide the administration an opportunity to appeal.
“The court anticipates this opinion will ignite public debate and likely lead to appeals. In a thriving democracy, both these outcomes are valuable,” Reyes articulated. “Nonetheless, it is universally agreeable that anyone who has heeded the call to serve warrants our gratitude and respect.”
Among the 14 transgender active-duty servicemembers involved in the litigation is Army Reserves 2nd Lt. Nicolas Talbott. Holding his breath in anticipation of the ruling, Talbott faced the prospect of being separated from service the following week.
“This is a huge relief,” he expressed, describing the military as his dream job which he feared losing imminently.
The White House remained silent in the immediate aftermath. However, Trump’s deputy chief of staff, Stephen Miller, voiced his disapproval on social media, retorting, “District court judges have taken control of the Armed Forces…is there a limit to this chaos?”
Judge Reyes granted a preliminary injunction, requested by attorneys representing additional individuals aspiring to enroll in military service.
In late January, Trump sanctioned an executive order, asserting that the sexual identity of transgender service members poses a conflict with a soldier’s commitment to honorable and disciplined living, supposedly jeopardizing military readiness.
Reacting to the order, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth implemented a policy that inherently disqualifies individuals with gender dysphoria from military service based on the distress experienced due to a mismatch between assigned gender and gender identity. The ailment is often associated with depression and suicidal ideations.
Lawyers for the plaintiffs argue that Trump’s order contravenes the Fifth Amendment rights of transgender individuals regarding equal protection. Meanwhile, government attorneys contend that military officials possess wide discretion over the assignment and deployment of personnel without judicial interference.
Despite acknowledging the gravity of her decision to issue an injunction on Trump’s order, Reyes stated that “Judicial overreach is no less harmful than executive overreach.” She maintained that each government branch has the responsibility of checking and balancing the others, stating, “The court must therefore act to protect the equal protection rights that military service members defend daily.”
Transgender individuals account for a small fraction, less than 1%, of the overall active-duty military population.
Back in 2016, a Department of Defense policy permitted open service by transgender persons in the military. Yet, during Trump’s first term, a directive was issued to ban transgender military personnel, a move upheld by the Supreme Court before President Joe Biden reversed it upon assuming office.
According to Hegseth’s February policy, service members or applicants exhibiting gender dysphoria or related symptoms are deemed incompatible with the mental and physical standards requisite for military service.
Among those challenging Trump’s order are an Army Reserves leader from Pennsylvania, an Army major honored with a Bronze Star for valor in Afghanistan, and a Sailor of the Year award recipient in the Navy.
“The tragic irony lies in that numerous transgender servicemembers have made sacrifices, some risking their lives to guarantee for others the very equal protection rights the military ban intends to deny them,” penned Reyes.
Lawyers from the National Center for Lesbian Rights and GLAD Law, representing the transgender troops, stated the plaintiffs aim to persist in dedicating their lives to national defense.
Their attorneys assert, “This order requires separation based on a characteristic irrelevant to their verified ability to perform their duties,” emphasizing the perceived peril in policy reversal which demeans honorable transgender servicemembers and disrupts unit cohesion.
Defense Department history of disqualifying individuals with physical or emotional impairments is noted by government lawyers who argue that the department possesses virtually unchallengeable professional judgment regarding service suitability.
The legal representatives for the plaintiffs suggest that Trump’s order exhibits a consistent pattern of discrimination against transgender people.
Federal judges in Seattle and Baltimore have paused separate Trump executive orders halting federal support for gender-affirming care for transgender youth and blocked the transfer of transgender women prisoners to men’s facilities, maintaining their access to hormone therapy. Additional policies signed by Trump involve education about gender and banning transgender athletes in women’s sports.
“At its inception, this administration has pursued policies stripping protections from transgender individuals across housing, social services, education, sports, healthcare, employment, international travel, and family life,” plaintiffs’ attorneys noted.
Talbott, 31, openly enlisted in the Army reserves in March 2024 after years of striving to join. Recognized for his age, his comrades never treated him differently due to his transgender identity. Talbott anticipates exuberance among his peers at his continued service.
“My focus can now return to the mission at hand,” said Talbott, a platoon leader within a military policing unit.
