A divided panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has partially upheld a preliminary injunction against a Pentagon policy that restricts transgender individuals from serving in the military. The ruling, issued by a 2-1 majority, applies only to current active-duty service members who are plaintiffs in the lawsuit.
Ruling and Scope
The appellate court's decision, issued on Monday, partially upholds a March 2025 preliminary injunction by U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes. Judge Reyes had determined that an executive order signed by President Donald Trump likely violates the constitutional rights of transgender service members.
The appeals court narrowed the scope of the original injunction. The ruling now applies only to active-duty service members who are plaintiffs in the case, and does not apply to individuals seeking to enlist in the military. The court has put its decision on hold, allowing the administration time to seek review by the full appeals court or the U.S. Supreme Court.
Background of the Policy
In January 2025, President Trump signed an executive order stating that a service member's transgender identity "conflicts with a soldier's commitment to an honorable, truthful, and disciplined lifestyle" and harms military readiness. In response, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth issued a policy that presumptively disqualifies individuals diagnosed with gender dysphoria from military service. Gender dysphoria is the distress felt when an individual's assigned sex at birth does not match their gender identity.
Court Opinions
Judge Robert Wilkins, writing for the majority, stated that the policy "appears to be driven by the bare desire to harm a politically unpopular group: persons who identify as transgender." Judge Judith Rogers joined Wilkins' opinion in part but also partially dissented.
In dissent, Judge Justin Walker argued that courts lack the authority to second-guess military membership decisions. "We have neither the expertise nor the authority to decide whether the military can exclude the plaintiffs from its ranks," he wrote.
Statements and Next Steps
"A powerful vindication of the plaintiffs' extraordinary courage."
Jennifer Levi of GLAD Law called the ruling a powerful vindication of the plaintiffs' courage. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth indicated that an appeal would be filed, posting "See you at SCOTUS" on social media. The U.S. Supreme Court had previously allowed a similar ban to take effect while litigation continues.
Related Litigation
A separate lawsuit challenging the ban, filed in Washington state, resulted in a ruling favoring the plaintiffs. That ruling was subsequently blocked by the U.S. Supreme Court.