US Supreme Court allows Trump’s transgender military ban to move forward

The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled in favor of former President Donald Trump’s executive order banning transgender people from serving in the military—sparking national debate over rights, equality, and military standards.

Just over a week after Donald Trump took office for his second term, he signed a controversial executive order titled “Prioritizing Military Excellence and Readiness.” The policy bans transgender individuals from joining the U.S. military and seeks to remove current service members who identify as transgender.

While the order had initially been blocked by U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes in March 2025, the Supreme Court overruled that decision on May 6, allowing the policy to go into effect while lawsuits against it continue.

The court’s unsigned order did not include a detailed explanation, but the three liberal justices—Ketanji Brown Jackson, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan—clearly voiced their disagreement.

Backlash from civil rights groups

Human rights and LGBTQ+ organizations have strongly condemned the Supreme Court’s decision. In a joint statement, Lambda Legal and the Human Rights Campaign Foundation said:

“By allowing this discriminatory ban to take effect while our challenge continues, the Court has temporarily sanctioned a policy that has nothing to do with military readiness and everything to do with prejudice.”

They emphasized that transgender service members already meet the same physical and psychological standards as others and should not be singled out based on identity.

The lawsuit against the policy was filed on behalf of six active-duty transgender military members and two individuals who want to enlist. Their legal team argues that the ban violates the Constitution’s equal protection clause by discriminating based on gender identity and sex.

What the Trump administration says

Supporters of the ban—including the Trump administration—claim that allowing transgender people to serve may interfere with the military’s goals. The executive order says the “pursuit of military excellence” has been “diluted” by “political agendas or other ideologies.”

It also argues that identifying as a different gender “conflicts with a soldier’s commitment to an honorable, truthful, and disciplined lifestyle.”

These arguments have been widely criticized as unfounded and offensive by advocates, mental health experts, and veterans’ organizations.

This is not the first time a transgender military ban has been challenged in court. A similar ban was introduced during Trump’s first presidency and faced numerous legal roadblocks before being lifted by President Joe Biden in 2021. The return of the ban in 2025 has reignited legal and cultural debates.

Judge Ana Reyes, who initially blocked the 2025 ban, said:

“The Military Ban… stigmatizes transgender persons as inherently unfit… [and] bears no relation to fact.”

She added that a balanced policy could have been created—one that protects both military readiness and Americans’ constitutional rights.

The Supreme Court’s decision is a major turning point in the national conversation about civil rights, inclusion, and the role of identity in government policy. While the ruling is not final, it allows the ban to be enforced for now—impacting thousands of active-duty service members and potential recruits.

This also raises a key question: Can a government claim to support freedom and equality while barring citizens from serving simply because of their gender identity?

The Supreme Court’s decision adds new urgency to the debate over transgender rights in America. For many, this is not just a military issue—it’s about the right to be treated equally, no matter who you are.

As legal battles continue, the spotlight remains on the question: Will justice and fairness ultimately prevail?