Court Rules Trump Transgender Military Ban Unconstitutional
A divided federal appeals court has ruled that the Trump administration’s policy banning transgender individuals from military service is unconstitutional, marking a significant legal setback for the administration and a major victory for LGBTQ+ rights advocates. The ruling, issued on the first day of Pride Month, protects current active-duty transgender service members from discharge but does not require the military to accept new transgender recruits.
The Ruling
On June 1, a 2-1 panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit found that the Pentagon policy implemented by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth was driven by unconstitutional animus toward transgender people. According to AP News, the majority opinion was written by Judge Robert Wilkins, an appointee of President Barack Obama, and joined by Judge Judith Rogers, appointed by President Bill Clinton. Judge Justin Walker, a Trump appointee, dissented.
Wilkins wrote that the policy “appears to be driven by the bare desire to harm a politically unpopular group: persons who identify as transgender,” and noted that the government “has not attempted to defend or provide any factual basis for these disparaging characterizations of American citizens.”
The ruling partially upholds a March 2025 preliminary injunction by U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes. It protects the six transgender active-duty service members who brought the lawsuit — who have served a combined 130 years and earned more than 80 commendations — from being discharged. However, it allows the administration to continue blocking transgender individuals who are seeking to enlist.
Background of the Ban
President Trump signed an executive order in January 2025 claiming that the sexual identity of transgender service members “conflicts with a soldier’s commitment to an honorable, truthful, and disciplined lifestyle, even in one’s personal life” and is harmful to military readiness. As CBS News reported, Hegseth subsequently issued a policy in February 2025 presumptively disqualifying people with gender dysphoria from military service unless they obtain a waiver.
The policy reversed the Biden administration’s position, which had allowed transgender individuals to serve openly. It also marked a return to restrictions similar to those Trump attempted to impose during his first term, which were also challenged in court.
The Dissent and Expected Appeal
Judge Walker dissented, arguing that courts lack the expertise and constitutional authority to second-guess military personnel decisions. He wrote that “only the executive and Congress are responsible for systemwide military judgments about the composition of the armed forces,” and noted that “the Supreme Court has never assumed that role for itself. Neither has the D.C. Circuit. Not until today.”
Hegseth signaled an immediate intent to appeal, posting on social media: “See you at SCOTUS.” The panel has put its decision on hold to allow the administration to seek further review, meaning the ban remains in effect for now. The Supreme Court previously allowed the Pentagon to enforce the ban while litigation continued, but has not ruled on the constitutional merits.
Impact and Implications
An estimated 4,200 troops had been diagnosed with gender dysphoria as of December 2024, according to a defense official cited by CBS News. Roughly 1,900 active-duty members received gender-affirming care between January 2016 and May 2021, according to the Congressional Research Service.
Jennifer Levi, senior director of transgender and queer rights at GLAD Law, called the decision “a powerful vindication of the plaintiffs’ extraordinary courage and unwavering commitment to their country.” Shannon Minter, legal director at the National Center for LGBTQ Rights, who argued on behalf of the plaintiffs, said the ruling represents “a dramatic shift in the status quo” and stops the administration from discharging service members who “were preparing to be hauled before review boards and discharged — despite years of honorable service.”
What’s Next
The case is widely expected to reach the Supreme Court, which holds a 6-3 conservative majority including three Trump appointees. The court’s previous decision to allow the ban to be enforced while litigation continues does not necessarily predict how it would rule on the constitutional question. The full D.C. Circuit could also choose to review the panel’s decision before any Supreme Court appeal.
As The Guardian noted, the ruling was issued on the first day of Pride Month, adding symbolic weight to the decision. The outcome will have significant implications not only for the estimated 1,000 openly transgender active-duty service members but also for the broader legal landscape of LGBTQ+ rights under the Trump administration.
The case represents one of several legal challenges to the administration’s second-term agenda, and its ultimate resolution could shape the boundaries of executive power over military personnel policy for years to come.