Home » Supreme Court Upholds Ban on Transgender Service Members

Supreme Court Upholds Ban on Transgender Service Members

by
Supreme court to examine colorado's conversion therapy ban for lgbtq

Supreme Court Upholds Ban on Transgender Military Service

Image from Shutterstock

Legal Developments in Transgender Military Service

On May 6, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court made a significant ruling by allowing the enforcement of a ban on transgender individuals serving in the military, a policy initiated by the Trump administration. This decision follows a preliminary injunction that was previously issued by U.S. District Judge Benjamin H. Settle, which suggested that the ban likely violates the Fifth Amendment rights related to equal protection and procedural due process, as well as the First Amendment rights concerning gender identity expression.

Judicial Opinions and Implications

The ruling, which stays Judge Settle’s previous injunction, elicited differing opinions from the justices. Notably, Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson expressed their dissent, indicating they would have denied the federal government’s request to stay the injunction.

Government’s Justification for the Ban

The Trump administration defended the ban on the grounds that the injunction imposed by Judge Settle contradicted the deference owed to military experts. They also referenced previous Supreme Court rulings that had allowed similar bans during Trump’s first term. In January of this year, President Trump issued two executive orders related to military service; the first rescinded a policy from the Biden administration that had permitted open service by transgender individuals, while the second emphasized strict mental and physical health standards for military personnel.

Ongoing Legal Challenge

The ban is currently facing legal challenges from seven transgender service members, a transgender man seeking to enlist, and the Gender Justice League, an advocacy organization. They are represented by Lambda Legal and the Human Rights Campaign. According to their statement, allowing the ban to take effect legitimizes a policy rooted in prejudice rather than military readiness.

Related Case Information

The ongoing case is officially titled United States v. Shilling.

For more insights and updates on this evolving story, stay tuned to reputable news sources.

Source link

You may also like

Don't Miss

Copyright ©️ 2025 Juris Review | All rights reserved.