The U.S. government has asked the Supreme Court to uphold the military’s ban on transgender service members, setting the stage for the court to weigh in on the controversial policy this fall. The administration’s request comes as it seeks to permanently enforce the prohibition, which was initially instituted through an executive order issued by former President Donald Trump shortly after he took office.
Trump’s 2017 directive barred all transgender individuals from serving in the armed forces, characterizing transgender identity as incompatible with military discipline and honesty. The Department of Defense implemented the policy in February 2025, resulting in the discharge of many transgender personnel. At the time, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth infamously summarized the policy with the phrase, “No more dudes in dresses.”
Approximately 4,200 openly transgender service members were recorded in military ranks as of last year, comprising about 0.1 percent of the total force. These individuals held a variety of key roles, including infantry leaders, pilots, medical professionals, and intelligence analysts. Following the implementation of the ban, several transgender service members filed lawsuits challenging the policy’s legality.
Lower courts issued mixed rulings. Some granted temporary protections preventing discharges while litigation proceeded, but in May, the Supreme Court’s conservative majority allowed the military to resume dismissals during ongoing legal battles. The current case before the justices involves 28 transgender service members led by Army Reserve Second Lieutenant Nicolas Talbott, who argue that the ban violates their rights and fosters unwarranted hostility toward transgender individuals.
In a recent filing, the government urged the Supreme Court to reverse lower court decisions siding with the plaintiffs and to defer to military leaders’ judgment. Solicitor General D. John Sauer contended that accommodating transgender troops would impair military effectiveness and lethality, framing the issue as one of critical institutional authority granted to the military.
A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued a 2-1 ruling in June favoring the challengers. Judges Robert L. Wilkins and Judith W. Rogers criticized the policy as motivated by political animus, while Judge Justin R. Walker dissented, emphasizing that the Constitution vests military personnel decisions in Congress and the commander in chief, not the judiciary.
Meanwhile, many transgender service members have either left the military voluntarily or remain in a state of uncertainty, awaiting decisions from military retention boards that typically result in discharge. The 28 plaintiffs in the Supreme Court case remain on leave but technically in the military, according to their attorneys.
Legal representatives for the transgender service members have asked the court to reject the government’s request to expedite a ruling and instead allow the case to proceed to trial. Jennifer Levi, senior director for transgender and queer rights at GLAD Law, stated that the government is seeking to dismiss “thousands of highly trained, skilled and decorated troops based on nothing but hostility.”
The Supreme Court previously addressed the ban on an emergency basis in May, allowing discharges to continue but without a majority explanation. The court’s liberal justices dissented, advocating for the policy to remain blocked.
The military’s transgender ban dates back to Trump’s first term, when courts initially blocked the policy. The Supreme Court lifted injunctions in 2019, permitting a revised ban to take effect while challenges continued until the Biden administration rescinded the ban after taking office. This case represents the latest judicial test of the policy’s validity.