Supreme Court Lets Trump Oust Transgender Servicemembers (3)

A divided US Supreme Court let the Trump administration start discharging thousands of transgender servicemembers, including people who have served openly for years.

Over dissents from the three liberal justices, the court dealt a major blow to LGBTQ rights, pausing a lower court order that had put President Donald Trump’s new ban on hold. None of the justices gave an explanation in the one-page order, which applies while the litigation continues.

During Trump’s first term, the Supreme Court let an earlier transgender military ban take effect, but the president’s new policy goes further by calling for the expulsion of people who have already transitioned.

“Today’s Supreme Court ruling is a devastating blow to transgender servicemembers who have demonstrated their capabilities and commitment to our nation’s defense,” said Lambda Legal and Human Rights Campaign Foundation, the groups pressing the challenge. “The court has temporarily sanctioned a policy that has nothing to do with military readiness and everything to do with prejudice.”

The decision is “another MASSIVE victory in the Supreme Court,” White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said on the X social media network.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said “No More Trans @ DoD” on his personal X account. In a speech earlier in the day, Hegseth denounced “pronouns” and “dudes in dresses,” saying that “we are done with that sh-t.”

At the Supreme Court, the administration said judges should defer to Trump’s assessment that the presence of transgender people in the armed services undermines military effectiveness. Opponents said the administration has no evidence for that claim and said trans people have served with honor and distinction for years.

The high court is separately deliberating over a major transgender-rights case involving state laws that ban puberty blockers, hormone therapy and surgery for those under 18.

Combat Pilot

Trump issued his ban through a Jan. 27 executive order, which said expressing a “false” gender identity “conflicts with a soldier’s commitment to an honorable, truthful, and disciplined lifestyle” and “is not consistent with the humility and selflessness required of a service member.”

The challengers in the high court case included seven active-duty servicemembers and a man who says he wants to join the Marines. The group is led by Navy Commander Emily Shilling, who has flown more than 60 combat missions as a pilot. Shilling, who served in both Afghanistan and Iraq and is a Navy test pilot, says the military has spent more than $20 million training her.

Shilling transitioned within the Navy starting in 2021, when President Joe Biden’s policy let transgender people serve openly in the armed forces.

“An unprecedented degree of animus towards transgender people animates and permeates the ban,” the group told the Supreme Court. “It is based on the shocking proposition that transgender people do not exist.”

US District Judge Benjamin Settle in Tacoma, Washington, said the administration hasn’t shown that the ban “is substantially related to achieving unit cohesion, good order, or discipline.” Settle said current and aspiring servicemembers probably would suffer multiple constitutional violations, including infringement of their rights to equal protection and free speech.

The administration’s top Supreme Court lawyer, US Solicitor General D. John Sauer, argued that Settle’s order forced the government to “maintain a policy that the department has found to be inconsistent with the best interests of the military services and with the interests of national security.”

A San Francisco-based federal appeals court refused to issue a stay of Settle’s order, prompting the administration to turn to the nation’s highest court.

The case is United States v. Shilling, 24A1030.

(Updates with Leavitt reaction in fourth paragraph.)

--With assistance from Courtney McBride and Josh Wingrove.

To contact the reporter on this story:
Greg Stohr in Washington at gstohr@bloomberg.net

To contact the editors responsible for this story:
Elizabeth Wasserman at ewasserman2@bloomberg.net

Steve Stroth

© 2025 Bloomberg L.P. All rights reserved. Used with permission.