Federal Court Issues Stern Warning to Pentagon Over Transgender Military Ban Appeal

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has issued a stern directive to the Pentagon, warning it not to take action against transgender service members while a federal judge's order blocking a controversial military ban is under appeal. This ruling comes amid a heated legal battle over the Trump administration's policy targeting transgender individuals in the armed forces.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and the Department of Defense (DOD) had filed a notice to appeal Judge Ana Reyes' decision to maintain the injunction against the ban. This ruling prevents the military from barring transgender people from enlisting, a policy that critics have described as discriminatory and medically unfounded.

Judge Reyes, appointed by President Biden, held firm in her stance during a March 21 hearing, where she requested the DOD delay its original deadline to implement the policy. The defendants, including Donald Trump and Hegseth, argued that the ban was not outright discrimination but rather a regulation tied to gender dysphoria—a medical condition they claim affects military readiness and costs.

While the administration insisted the policy targeted a specific medical issue rather than transgender individuals as a class, Reyes was unconvinced. She highlighted the reality that gender dysphoria uniquely impacts transgender people, making the policy inherently discriminatory.

The D.C. Circuit clarified that its administrative stay is merely procedural, allowing time to consider the emergency motion without ruling on the merits. However, any adverse action against transgender service members during this period could prompt an expedited court response.

Hegseth, in a move that raised eyebrows, suggested Judge Reyes should "report to military bases" since she is now "a top military planner." His sarcastic remarks on social media implied frustration with the judge's decisions, though they did little to bolster the administration's position.

The government had issued new guidance on March 21, claiming the ban would have been implemented if not for ongoing litigation. Yet, Reyes dismissed their arguments, emphasizing that regulating gender dysphoria is not akin to addressing other medical conditions like bipolar disorder or eating disorders. In her view, the ban's focus on gender dysphoria unfairly targets transgender individuals.

The legal saga continues, with the court giving the appellees until April 1 to file a response. For now, transgender service members can breathe a sigh of relief as the battle over their right to serve unfolds in the nation's capital.