A federal judge has indefinitely blocked President Donald Trump’s ban on transgender service members, marking a significant setback for a controversial policy revived from his first term.
The ruling, delivered by US District Judge Ana Reyes, prevents the administration from enforcing the ban, which had been scheduled to take effect later this month. Reyes, appointed by former President Joe Biden, sharply criticised the measure in her decision.
Reyes wrote that the 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.”
“Indeed, the cruel irony is that thousands of transgender service members have sacrificed – some risking their lives – to ensure for others the very equal protection rights the Military Ban seeks to deny them,” she wrote.
While the preliminary injunction is in place, Reyes said she would delay its effect until Friday morning to give the administration time to appeal to the DC Circuit Court of Appeals.
According to CNN, the case was brought by transgender individuals already serving in the military, along with those who wished to enlist but would be excluded under the ban. Reyes said the plaintiffs had demonstrated a strong likelihood of success in proving the ban infringes on constitutional protections.
Trump introduced the new directive shortly after returning to office, instructing the Pentagon to implement policies deeming transgender individuals incompatible with military service. The administration argued the continued inclusion of transgender personnel would harm the military’s effectiveness, cohesion, and readiness.
“Defendants have not provided a legitimate reason for banning all transgender troops,” the judge wrote.
CNN reported that it had contacted the Defense Department for comment on the ruling.
Justice Department lawyers defended the president’s authority to determine military policy, but Reyes dismissed that argument, stating: “The President has the power — indeed the obligation — to ensure military readiness.”
“At times, however, leaders have used concern for military readiness to deny marginalized persons,” Reyes continued. “First minorities, then women in combat, then gays filled in that blank. Today, however, our military is stronger and our Nation is safer for the millions of such blanks (and all other persons) who serve.”
During Trump’s first term, a similar ban issued in 2017 faced multiple lawsuits claiming it constituted unconstitutional sex discrimination. Federal courts across the country blocked that ban from being implemented, ruling it violated the rights of transgender individuals.
Although the Supreme Court allowed that earlier ban to proceed in 2019, it did not rule on its constitutionality. President Biden subsequently reversed the policy in 2021.
Last month, the Pentagon issued guidance to enforce Trump’s new order, outlining the discharge of transgender service members who fail to meet the criteria under the revised rules.
ALSO READ: US: Trump administration releases new JFK assassination records
“Service members who have a current diagnosis or history of, or exhibit symptoms consistent with, gender dysphoria will be processed for separation from military service,” said a memo outlining the new policy, which was signed by the official performing the duties of the under secretary of defense for personnel and readiness.
“The Department only recognizes two sexes: male and female,” the policy memo says. “An individual’s sex is immutable, unchanging during a person’s life. All service members will only serve in accordance with their sex.”
A senior defence official estimated there are currently 4,240 transgender service members across the active-duty, reserve, and National Guard forces diagnosed with gender dysphoria. The official also said around 1,000 service members had received gender-affirming surgery between 2014 and 2025.
Reyes’ ruling was welcomed by the legal team representing the plaintiffs.
“Today’s decisive ruling speaks volumes,” said Jennifer Levi, an attorney with GLAD Law. “The Court’s unambiguous factual findings lay bare how this ban specifically targets and undermines our courageous service members who have committed themselves to defending our nation. Given the Court’s clear-eyed assessment, we are confident this ruling will stand strong on appeal.”
ALSO READ TOP STORIES FROM NIGERIAN TRIBUNE
and then