Washington — The Supreme Court on Tuesday said it will allow the Trump administration to implement its policy barring transgender people from serving in the military while legal proceedings move forward.
The high court agreed to pause a lower court order that had blocked the administration from implementing its ban nationwide. The Justice Department sought emergency relief from the Supreme Court after a federal appeals court left in place that district court’s injunction. Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson said they would deny the administration’s request.
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt cheered the Supreme Court’s order as a “massive victory” and said in a social media post that President Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth “are restoring a military that is focused on readiness and lethality – not DEI or woke gender ideology.”
But Lambda Legal and the Human Rights Campaign, which are representing the service members challenging the ban, reiterated their belief that the policy violates the Constitution and will ultimately be invalidated.
“Today’s Supreme Court ruling is a devastating blow to transgender service members who have demonstrated their capabilities and commitment to our nation’s defense,” the groups said in a statement. “By allowing this discriminatory ban to take effect while our challenge continues, the court has temporarily sanctioned a policy that has nothing to do with military readiness and everything to do with prejudice. Transgender individuals meet the same standards and demonstrate the same values as all who serve.”
The policy stems from an executive order Mr. Trump signed in January that targeted active-duty and prospective service members with gender dysphoria. The measure said the military’s “high standards for troop readiness, lethality, cohesion, honesty, humility, uniformity and integrity” are inconsistent with the “medical, surgical and mental health constraints on individuals with gender dysphoria.”
Mr. Trump’s directive said the “adoption of a gender identity inconsistent with an individual’s sex conflicts with a soldier’s commitment to an honorable, truthful, and disciplined lifestyle, even in one’s personal life. A man’s assertion that he is a woman, and his requirement that others honor this falsehood, is not consistent with the humility and selflessness required of a service member.”
SPARTA Pride, a nonprofit representing transgender service members, veterans and their supporters, has disputed that characterization, saying: “Transgender Americans have served openly and honorably in the U.S. Armed Forces for nearly a decade. Thousands of transgender troops are currently serving, and are fully qualified for the positions in which they serve.”
The president banned transgender people from serving in the military during his first term, and the Supreme Court allowed it to take effect in 2019. But former President Joe Biden revoked that policy when he took office in 2021.
Following Mr. Trump’s new executive order, Hegseth directed the Pentagon to pause new accessions for people with a history of gender dysphoria and halt gender-affirming medical procedures. The Defense Department then issued a new policy in February that disqualified people with gender dysphoria from military service unless they obtained a waiver. The branches had to start identifying and separating transgender service members by March 26.
There are more than 1.2 million active-duty members of the military, according to the Defense Department. Between January 2016 and May 2021, roughly 1,892 service members received gender-affirming care from the Pentagon, according to the Congressional Research Service.
A defense official said that as of Dec. 9, there were about 4,200 troops who had been diagnosed with gender dysphoria. The Pentagon spent roughly $52 million on medical care to treat gender dysphoria between 2015 and 2024, according to a Defense Department memo.
The Trump administration’s ban led to legal challenges filed in Washington, D.C., and Tacoma, Washington. The case before the Supreme Court stems from the lawsuit brought in Tacoma on behalf of seven transgender service members, one transgender person who wants to join the military and an advocacy group. The plaintiffs argued the policy unconstitutionally discriminated against them based on sex and transgender status.
A federal district court judge agreed in March to block implementation of the ban and required the Trump administration to reinstate the policy put in place by Biden. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit then declined to grant the Trump administration emergency relief and allow the administration to enforce the ban while litigation proceeds.
The Justice Department had argued in a Supreme Court filing that Mr. Trump’s policy draws classifications not based on transgender status and sex, but by medical condition, gender dysphoria. Solicitor General John Sauer wrote that the political branches have the authority to decide the composition of the armed forces, which the Pentagon exercised when it decided to exclude transgender people from military service.
“[I]f the separation of powers means anything, the government obviously suffers irreparable harm when an unelected judge usurps the role of the political branches in operating the nation’s armed forces,” Sauer wrote.
He argued that the district court’s injunction forces the military to maintain a policy — issued under the Biden administration — that the Pentagon found to be inconsistent with the interests of national security.
But lawyers for the transgender service members said that allowing the Trump administration to enforce the ban would upend the status quo because it would clear the way for the government to start discharging thousands of transgender service members, ending their careers and hollowing out military units.
“The record is clear and indubitable: equal service by openly transgender servicemembers has improved our military’s readiness, lethality, and unit cohesion, while discharging transgender servicemembers from our Armed Forces would harm all three, as well as the public fisc,” referring to public finances, they wrote in a filing.
The transgender members of the armed forces said that the ban is awash with animus toward transgender people and noted that while the Supreme Court allowed an earlier iteration to take effect during the first Trump administration, this policy is much broader as it would force the expulsion of every transgender service member.
“The ban was issued for the openly discriminatory purpose of expressing governmental disapproval of transgender people — even in their personal lives — and rendering them unequal to others,” they wrote.
