On March 18, 2025, a federal judge in Washington blocked the Pentagon from enforcing President Donald Trump's order barring transgender people from serving in the military. It was the first major ruling against the policy, but not the last word: the Supreme Court allowed the ban to take effect two months later, and the legal fight has continued ever since.

This page was first published the day of that ruling. It has been rewritten to explain the full case and is updated as it develops.

What the policy does

Trump signed an executive order on Jan. 27, 2025, declaring that the medical and mental health constraints associated with gender dysphoria were inconsistent with the military's "high standards for troop readiness, lethality, cohesion, honesty, humility, uniformity, and integrity." A Pentagon policy issued on Feb. 26 — often called the Hegseth policy, after Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth — disqualifies people with a current diagnosis or history of gender dysphoria, or symptoms of it, from joining or remaining in the armed forces. It allows narrow, case-by-case waivers for people who have never attempted to transition and who agree to serve under the standards for their birth sex.

The administration argues that the rule targets a medical condition, not transgender people as such, and that the military has broad authority to set its own standards. The service members challenging it say it is a ban on transgender people in all but name.

Estimates of how many transgender people serve vary widely. A 2016 study for the Defense Department by the RAND Corporation estimated between 1,320 and 6,630 on active duty, out of about 1.3 million troops.

Timeline

January 2025 — The order and the first lawsuits

Within days of the order, transgender service members filed suit. The lead case, Talbott v. United States, is named for Nicolas Talbott, an Army Reserve officer, and was brought by the National Center for LGBTQ Rights and GLAD Law. A second major case, Shilling v. United States, was filed in Washington state on behalf of Navy Cmdr. Emily Shilling and others.

March 18, 2025 — Judge Reyes blocks the ban

U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes ruled that the policy likely violated the Constitution's guarantee of equal protection and issued a preliminary injunction. "The Court's opinion is long, but its premise is simple," she wrote. "In the self-evident truth that 'all people are created equal,' all means all" (NPR). The government appealed, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit put her order on hold while it considered the case. Days later, a federal judge in Washington state blocked the policy in the Shilling case.

May 6, 2025 — The Supreme Court lets the ban take effect

Acting on the Shilling case, the Supreme Court granted the administration's request to pause the injunction while the litigation continued, allowing the Pentagon to begin enforcing the policy. The court's three liberal justices — Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson — said they would have denied the request (CNN). The Pentagon then set deadlines for transgender troops to leave voluntarily before involuntary separations began.

June 1, 2026 — An appeals court rules for the plaintiffs

A divided D.C. Circuit panel upheld Reyes's injunction for the current service members who brought the Talbott case, while allowing the Pentagon to keep applying the rules to people seeking to enlist. Writing for the majority, Judge Robert Wilkins said the policy "appears to be driven by the bare desire to harm a politically unpopular group" (GV Wire). Because the ruling covered only the plaintiffs, other transgender troops remained subject to the ban. The decision took effect in mid-July (Military Times).

Summer 2026 — A class action and a trial date

At the end of June, Reyes certified Talbott as a class action, which would allow the case to cover transgender service members beyond the named plaintiffs. Extending her injunction to the whole class required further steps in her court. She set a two-week trial for January 2027 (The Advocate; Military Times).

August 28, 2026 — Back to the Supreme Court

The Justice Department asked the Supreme Court to review the D.C. Circuit's ruling and let the Pentagon proceed with discharging the plaintiffs before trial. "The authority of the U.S. military to determine who may serve in the nation's armed forces is a matter of exceptional importance," the government wrote. Lawyers for the service members urged the justices to deny the request (Stars and Stripes).

How this compares with Trump's first term

In 2017, Trump announced on Twitter that transgender people would not be allowed to serve "in any capacity." Courts blocked that plan, and a narrower version took effect in 2019 after the Supreme Court allowed it. President Joe Biden reversed the policy in January 2021. The current policy is broader than the 2019 version, because it applies to troops already serving openly, many of whom transitioned with the military's approval.

What happens next

As of mid-October 2026, the Supreme Court had not acted on the government's petition. Unless the justices intervene, the trial in Reyes's courtroom is scheduled to begin in January 2027, and whichever side loses there is likely to appeal.

Sources