Background on the Policy

On a recent afternoon, the Supreme Court made a significant ruling permitting the Trump administration to enforce a contentious Department of Defense policy that prohibits transgender people from serving in the U.S. military. This decision effectively pauses a previous order from a federal court in Washington state, which had barred the implementation of such a ban across the United States.

Executive Orders and Policy Changes

Upon taking office in January 2021, President Joe Biden enacted an executive order allowing transgender individuals to serve openly in the military. In a reversal, President Donald Trump rescinded this order on January 20 of the same year, instating a new directive aimed at prohibiting those diagnosed with gender dysphoria from military service. This term refers to the distress experienced when a person’s assigned sex at birth does not align with their gender identity.

Implementation of the Ban

On February 26, the Department of Defense announced the ban, disqualifying individuals either diagnosed with gender dysphoria or those who have undergone medical procedures related to their condition from military enlistment. The department stated that “the medical, surgical, and mental health constraints on individuals with a diagnosis of gender dysphoria are incompatible with the high standards of mental and physical fitness required for military service.”

Legal Challenges

A coalition of seven current transgender service members and one aspiring transgender recruit, alongside a nonprofit organization representing transgender troops, challenged the ban in federal court. The case’s lead plaintiff, Commander Emily Shilling, has served as a naval aviator for almost 20 years and highlights the significant investment the Navy has made in her training, estimated at $20 million.

U.S. District Judge Benjamin Settle ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, asserting that the ban violates constitutional protections of equal treatment, characterizing it as a “de facto blanket ban on transgender service.”

Supreme Court’s Ruling

Subsequent to the appeals court’s refusal to temporarily halt Judge Settle’s order, the Trump administration sought intervention from the Supreme Court on April 24. They argued that without the Court’s involvement, the lower court’s decision would impose prolonged restrictions on military policy, which they deemed detrimental to military readiness and national interests.

The plaintiffs contended that the Supreme Court’s approval to pause Settle’s order would disrupt established conditions, risking the careers of thousands of transgender service members and undermining military cohesion.

Decision Outcome

In a brief, unsigned decision, the Supreme Court granted the Trump administration’s request to put Judge Settle’s order on hold while further legal proceedings occur in the 9th Circuit court and potentially before the Supreme Court itself. Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson, who were appointed by Democratic presidents, suggested they would have denied the government’s appeal, although they did not provide their reasoning.