A federal judge in Washington, D.C., has dealt a major setback to the Trump administration’s efforts to implement a policy that would effectively prevent transgender individuals from enlisting in the U.S. military. The ruling, issued Wednesday by U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes, blocks the policy from going into effect as scheduled and signals that the legal fight over transgender military service is far from over.
Judge Reyes, appointed by President Biden, rejected the administration’s motion to dissolve an existing injunction that has barred the Department of Defense from enforcing the ban. The Department of Justice has already filed a notice of appeal with the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, but Reyes made clear that the court will not rush to lift its hold on the policy while the appeals process unfolds.
At issue is a policy first introduced under the Trump administration that would prohibit individuals diagnosed with gender dysphoria from joining the armed forces. The Pentagon argues the restriction is based on medical readiness, deployability, and cost concerns, not on a person’s transgender identity per se.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and other administration officials assert that the policy does not amount to a ban on transgender service members, but instead regulates a medical condition—an argument Reyes explicitly rejected.
“Gender dysphoria is not like other medical conditions,” Reyes wrote in her ruling. “It affects only one group of people: all persons with gender dysphoria are transgender and only transgender persons experience gender dysphoria.” In short, the policy’s medical framing does not mask its practical effect — excluding transgender individuals from military service.
The Department of Defense had issued updated guidance just days before the scheduled implementation of the policy, stating it would only apply to individuals with a formal diagnosis of gender dysphoria. But Reyes noted that while the language may have shifted, the core argument remained unchanged — and unconvincing.
Adding fuel to the political fire, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth took to social media after the ruling, sarcastically suggesting that Judge Reyes report for duty at Fort Benning to instruct Army Rangers in high-value target raids. “Commander Reyes can dispatch to Fort Bragg to train our Green Berets,” he added — a remark that reflects the simmering tension between the executive branch and the judiciary over military policy.
Reyes responded indirectly during her ruling, acknowledging the contentious national debate that has surrounded her decision. “This is all to the good,” she said of the appeals process, but reminded observers of the sacrifices made by service members that allow these debates to unfold in the first place.
The ruling also arrives as the Supreme Court prepares to weigh in on a separate but related case, United States v. Skrmetti, which centers on the rights of transgender minors to receive gender-related medical treatments under the Equal Protection Clause. Together, these cases form a broader legal battleground over how federal and state governments may regulate — or restrict — the rights of transgender individuals in the name of public policy, health, or safety.
