A federal court in Washington, D.C., Ana Reyes, has granted a preliminary injunction against President Donald Trump’s executive order banning transgender individuals from serving in the U.S. military. The ruling, issued on March 18, 2025, halts the implementation of the ban pending further litigation.
The court’s decision was in response to a lawsuit filed by a group of transgender active-duty servicemembers and enlistees who argued that the ban violates their constitutional rights to equal protection under the Fifth Amendment. The plaintiffs claimed that the policy, which was issued in January 2025, is based on animosity toward transgender individuals rather than legitimate military concerns.
The court found that the Trump administration’s policy, which disqualifies individuals with a current or past diagnosis of gender dysphoria from military service, lacks substantial evidence to support its claims about military readiness and unit cohesion. The court noted that the policy was rushed and lacked analysis or data to justify its conclusions, contrasting it with previous policies that allowed transgender individuals to serve openly.
The ruling also highlighted the service records of the plaintiffs, who collectively have served over 130 years in the military with distinction, earning numerous commendations and promotions. The court concluded that the ban would cause irreparable harm to these individuals and that the balance of equities and public interest favor granting the injunction.
Reyes wrote, “In our constitutional republic, citizens are free to hold and express divergent views. But when “sincere, personal opposition [to a group of people] becomes enacted law and public policy, the necessary consequence is to put the imprimatur of the State itself on an exclusion that soon demeans or stigmatizes those whose own liberty is then denied.” Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U.S. 644, 672 (2015). Such is the case here. The Military Ban is soaked in animus and dripping with pretext. Its language is unabashedly demeaning, its policy stigmatizes transgender persons as inherently unfit, and its conclusions bear no relation to fact. Thus, even if the Court analyzed the Military Ban under rational basis review, it would fail.”
“Indeed, the cruel irony is that thousands of transgender servicemembers have sacrificed—some risking their lives—to ensure for others the very equal protection rights the Military Ban seeks to deny them.”
The Trump administration has not yet announced whether it will appeal the decision. The court’s order is stayed until March 21, 2025, to allow time for an emergency appeal to the D.C. Circuit.
