Federal Court Finds Pentagon’s Ban on Transgender Troops Unlawful
An appellate court has ruled against a Pentagon policy that prohibited transgender individuals from serving in the military, marking a significant legal defeat for former President Donald Trump’s agenda. The decision was handed down by a divided panel of judges from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
The panel’s majority opinion concluded that the policy was intended to bar individuals based on their gender identity. The U.S. Supreme Court had previously allowed the ban to be enforced as legal proceedings continued.
While the new ruling prevents the expulsion of current service members named in the case, it does not permit the enlistment of new transgender recruits. The judges have paused their ruling to allow for further government review.
This appeals court decision partially supports a March 2025 verdict by U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes, who found that Trump’s executive order likely infringes on the constitutional rights of transgender troops.
The administration sought to overturn Reyes’ preliminary injunction, which was requested by lawyers representing active-duty transgender service members and others wishing to enlist. The majority in the appeals court ruled to limit the injunction to current service members.
In a separate but related case, another lawsuit in Washington state also resulted in a favorable ruling for plaintiffs contesting the ban, although it has been blocked by the Supreme Court (source).
Trump’s January 2025 executive order stated that transgender individuals’ sexual identity was inconsistent with military discipline and readiness. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth subsequently issued a policy disqualifying those with gender dysphoria from service. Gender dysphoria, linked to distress from a mismatch between assigned gender and identity, can lead to depression and suicidal thoughts.
Judge Robert Wilkins, nominated by President Barack Obama, wrote in the majority opinion that the policy seemed aimed at harming a politically unpopular group. “Today’s decision is a powerful vindication of the plaintiffs’ extraordinary courage and unwavering commitment to their country,” remarked Jennifer Levi from GLAD Law.
The Pentagon has yet to respond officially, but Defense Secretary Hegseth suggested an appeal might be forthcoming, mentioning “See you at SCOTUS” on social media.
In dissent, Judge Justin Walker argued that the judiciary should not question military decisions, as such authority lies with Congress and the President. Judge Judith Rogers, who joined the majority opinion, partially dissented, expressing her view that new recruits named in the lawsuit should be allowed to join.
