Court Battle Over Trump’s Transgender Military Ban: Rights in Question

Lawsuit document with gavel, pen, and open book.

Six transgender service members are challenging President Trump’s military service ban, citing discrimination and violation of equal protection rights.

Key Takeaways

Six transgender service members filed a lawsuit against Trump’s executive order banning transgender troops.
The executive order reinstates Trump’s first-term policy, reversing the open service policy from 2021.
Legal teams argue that the order is unconstitutional, based on animus against a specific group.
The Pentagon plans to implement the order as directed, without commenting on the litigation.
Transgender individuals have served openly for years, proving their capability and meeting military standards.

The Legal Challenge Begins

Six transgender active duty service members, along with two former members, have initiated a lawsuit against President Trump’s executive order that seeks to potentially ban transgender individuals from serving in the armed forces. This lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court of the District of Columbia by legal organizations NCLR and GLAD. The plaintiffs, who have served honorably, argue that the order constitutes gender-based and transgender discrimination, violating the Fifth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause.

The executive order, entitled “Prioritizing Military Excellence and Readiness,” is justified by the administration as necessary for maintaining military effectiveness and unit cohesion. It reverses a previous executive order from President Biden, which allowed transgender individuals to serve openly. The revised policy restricts transition-related medical care and facility access based on one’s birth-assigned gender, under the guise of preserving military values and readiness.

JUST IN: Six transgender service members are suing Trump/Hegseth over new ban on trans people serving in the military. https://t.co/anfxQIXKz4 pic.twitter.com/vVvgjQFnJW

— Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) January 28, 2025

Support for Transgender Service Members

The plaintiffs include highly decorated service members such as a Sailor of the Year honoree and a Bronze Star recipient, who have demonstrated their capacity to meet the rigorous standards expected of all military personnel. Army Capt. Gordon Herrero, a plaintiff, stated, “There’s nothing about being transgender that makes me better or worse than any other soldier I serve alongside. We are all here because we are committed to our country, and we are passionate, willing, and able to serve effectively.”

This sentiment is echoed by other plaintiffs who have served openly for the past four years, during which time they have met military standards and effectively completed their duties. Despite the legal challenges, the Pentagon stated it will uphold President Trump’s executive order but refrained from commenting on the ongoing litigation.

Continuing Legal and Social Discussions

The legal teams behind this lawsuit, including Lambda Legal and the Human Rights Campaign, plan to further challenge the executive order, arguing that it is unconstitutional for basing policies on the disapproval of specific groups. The Supreme Court’s decision in Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia, has strengthened this legal challenge by recognizing discrimination based on transgender status as sex discrimination.

This case serves as a critical examination of how current military policies align with broader principles of service eligibility and membership standards. It emphasizes the ongoing debate between inclusivity within the armed forces and the asserted need for maintaining operational cohesion and readiness.