Supreme Court Allows Trump Military Transgender Ban \ Newslooks \ Washington DC \ Mary Sidiqi \ Evening Edition \ The Supreme Court has allowed President Trump’s ban on transgender individuals serving in the military to take effect while lawsuits continue. The policy, challenged by decorated transgender service members, is being enforced despite lower court rulings that found it discriminatory. Legal battles are ongoing in multiple federal courts.
Quick Looks
- Supreme Court permits Trump’s transgender troop ban to proceed during litigation.
- Policy disqualifies transgender individuals from military service with no exception.
- Three liberal justices dissented, opposing the ban’s enforcement.
- Seven decorated transgender service members filed suit, including combat veteran Emily Shilling.
- Federal judges previously blocked the policy, calling it discriminatory and damaging.
- Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth ordered military branches to identify transgender troops.
- LGBTQ groups decry the ban as unconstitutional and prejudiced.
- Trump’s executive order cited “incompatibility” with military values.
- Appeals courts remain divided as legal challenges continue.
- Biden reversed Trump’s earlier ban in 2021, but Trump reinstated it upon re-election.
Deep Look
In a major development that affects thousands of active-duty personnel, the Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday to allow President Donald Trump’s administration to enforce its controversial ban on transgender military service members while ongoing legal battles continue in the lower courts. The 5-4 decision, split along ideological lines, represents a temporary but significant victory for Trump’s broader rollback of transgender rights within the federal government.
The policy at the center of the dispute prohibits transgender individuals from serving openly in the U.S. military, reversing guidelines from the Obama administration, which in 2016 had authorized open service for transgender troops. The ban, reintroduced by Trump at the start of his second term through executive order, contains no exceptions and mandates the removal of current transgender service members, even those with distinguished records.
Among those challenging the ban are seven long-serving transgender military members, including Emily Shilling, a Navy commander with nearly two decades of service and 60 combat missions in Iraq and Afghanistan. Together, the plaintiffs represent over 115 years of military service and have received more than 70 medals. Their lawsuit, originally filed in Tacoma, Washington, argues that the ban is not only discriminatory but damaging to morale, national security, and constitutional protections.
U.S. District Judge Benjamin Settle, a former military officer and a Republican appointee, agreed with the plaintiffs, blocking the policy nationwide and stating that the administration failed to explain why openly serving transgender troops—who had caused no reported disruptions in over four years—suddenly posed a threat to military readiness.
“The administration has offered no evidence to justify this abrupt change,” Settle wrote, calling the policy a form of “institutionalized prejudice.”
However, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals put a hold on the nationwide injunction, finding the administration may ultimately prevail due to the president’s broad constitutional authority over military affairs. The appellate panel, which includes two Trump-appointed judges, appeared sympathetic to the administration’s rationale during oral arguments last month.
The Justice Department then appealed to the Supreme Court, which on Tuesday allowed the ban to take effect while the appeals process plays out. Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan dissented, signaling their concern over the policy’s human and constitutional implications.
The Trump administration claims the ban is necessary because transgender identity conflicts with a military lifestyle, asserting it undermines values of discipline and “honor.” The executive order further directs the Pentagon to identify and remove current transgender personnel—a task formalized by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, who gave all military branches 30 days to implement enforcement measures.
“They are to be removed from the force,” said Hegseth, who has repeatedly called for eliminating “woke” policies in military ranks.
Legal Pushback and Broader Impact
The administration’s position has drawn widespread condemnation from civil rights groups, military advocates, and a bipartisan group of lawmakers. Lambda Legal, one of the organizations representing the plaintiffs, issued a scathing statement following the high court’s ruling.
“By allowing this discriminatory ban to take effect while our challenge continues, the Court has temporarily sanctioned a policy rooted in prejudice, not readiness,” the group said. “Transgender troops meet the same standards as all others who serve.”
Other federal judges have also pushed back. A court in New Jersey blocked the removal of two transgender Air Force personnel, citing irreversible professional and reputational harm. In Washington, D.C., a federal judge had similarly blocked the policy, though that order was suspended by an appeals court pending review.
The legal dispute is expected to continue for months, if not years, with the Ninth Circuit set to hear full arguments later this year. The ongoing nature of the litigation means the transgender ban, while now temporarily in force, remains far from settled law.
Historical and Political Context
The debate over transgender service in the U.S. military dates back years. Under President Barack Obama, the Defense Department opened the doors for transgender troops to serve openly. That policy was partly reversed during Trump’s first term, though certain protections were grandfathered in for individuals already undergoing gender transition.
President Joe Biden, upon taking office in 2021, swiftly reversed Trump’s earlier policy, restoring full access and equal protections for transgender service members. However, with Trump’s return to office in 2025, the administration quickly reinstated the ban—this time without exceptions, and with stricter enforcement mechanisms.
While exact numbers are difficult to verify, it is estimated that between 1,000 and 15,000 transgender individuals serve across all branches of the U.S. military, including active-duty and reserve components. That represents less than 1% of the total force, yet legal and advocacy groups argue that the impact of the ban is symbolically and operationally profound, threatening morale, retention, and the integrity of military nondiscrimination policies.
You must Register or Login to post a comment.