A federal judge in Washington has raised questions about the Pentagon’s approach to testosterone treatments amid a lawsuit challenging the ban on transgender individuals serving in the military. U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes sought clarification on how testosterone replacement therapy (TRT) for service members is being administered and how it compares to hormone treatments provided to transgender men.

The inquiry came as part of ongoing litigation against President Donald Trump’s transgender military ban. Reyes directed both sides involved in the case to explain the “similarities and differences in administering TRT, both medically and logistically, for trans men compared to other service members, including cisgender individuals.” She also requested that the Department of Defense provide the rationale for any differential treatment between transgender male troops and others in connection with TRT and the enforcement of the military ban.

Reyes’s order follows an announcement last week by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, who revealed a new initiative to screen service members for “testosterone deficiency.” Under the program, troops age 30 and over will receive annual testosterone level screenings as part of their routine medical examinations, while younger service members may volunteer for testing. Hegseth described the effort as a means to help troops perform at their "absolute best," and emphasized that any testosterone replacement therapy would be voluntary.

While Hegseth and other officials have voiced support for expanding access to testosterone treatments, their messaging blends established scientific evidence—such as the natural age-related decline in testosterone linked to symptoms like low libido and fatigue—with broader claims that lack consensus in the medical community. Experts continue to debate how to properly diagnose testosterone deficiency and determine when hormone replacement is necessary.

Judge Reyes, appointed by President Joe Biden, has been presiding over one of the lawsuits challenging Trump’s policy. The case was filed in January 2025 by current and former transgender service members seeking to reenlist. Last year, Reyes ruled against the executive order barring transgender troops. Although parts of her order were upheld on appeal by a divided federal panel, the ban remains in effect pending ongoing litigation. The Supreme Court has permitted the Department of Defense to enforce the policy while the legal process continues.

With the case granted class-action status, the outcome could potentially affect all service members impacted by the transgender military ban, amplifying the significance of the questions raised about hormone treatments and differential medical policies within the armed forces.