Supreme Court allows Trump to enforce transgender forces bans as case progresses

The Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday that the Trump administration could begin enforcing trans forces that prohibit service in lower court blockades.

The ruling is brief, unsigned, and has no reason, which is typical of the justices when they act on an emergency application. It will remain in place while the ban challenge moves forward.

Three liberal members of the court – Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson pointed out the objection, but offered no reason.

The case involves an executive order issued on the first day of Trump's second term. It revoked President Joseph R. Biden Jr.'s order that allows transgender service members to serve publicly.

A week later, Mr. Trump issued a second order saying “The adoption of gender identity with individuals’ gender conflict is inconsistent with the soldiers’ commitment to a lifestyle of glorious, authentic and discipline.”

The Defense Department implemented Mr. Trump's order in February, issuing a new policy that requires transgender forces to withdraw from the military.

Seven active service members and one who tried to sign and an advocacy group filed a lawsuit seeking to block the policy and said that, among other things, it complies with the equal protection provisions of the Constitution.

One of the plaintiffs, cmdr. Emily Shilling, who began his transition during his Navy service in 2021, has been a naval pilot for 19 years and has flew over 60 combat missions, including in Iraq and Afghanistan. Her lawyer said the Navy had spent $20 million on training.

In March, Judge Benjamin H. Setel of the Federal District Court of Tacoma, Washington.

“There is no claim, nor evidence that she has now or ever had any damage to the cohesion of her troops, or that she has lethal or ready for the army, or that she cannot continue to serve mentally or physically,” Judge Settle wrote. “There is no claim, nor evidence that she is dishonest or selfish to leave first, or that she lacks humility or integrity. But without the injunction, she will be discharged quickly, simply because she is a transgender person.”

Judge Settle, appointed by President George W. Bush, wrote that the government failed to prove that the ban was “basically related to achieving unit cohesion, good order or discipline.”

“Although the court respects military decisions, it will be undisputed evidence that the government's frank resolution of plaintiffs has shown that years of open trans services have promoted these goals,” the judge added.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit refused to block Judge Settle's ruling when considering the government's appeal.

The government then sought emergency relief from the Supreme Court, saying that “the district court injunction cannot be associated with the department’s professional military judgments should owe a lot of respect.”

The government said at least that the Supreme Court should limit Justice Ante’s ruling to plaintiffs in the case and lift the balance of the national injunction.

Judge Settle's ruling follows a similar ruling from Judge Anna Reyes, a judge in the Washington Federal District Court. “The law does not require illogical judgments for the court rubber stamp,” wrote Judge Reyes, appointed by Biden.

The District of Columbia Tour entered an “administrative stay,” he said a brief pause in enforcing Judge Reyes's ruling “should not be construed as a ruling in any way.” The court is expected to rule at the request of the government that it blocked Judge Reyes' ruling when the appeal was underway.

Early in his first term, Mr. Trump announced a transgender ban on Twitter, but two federal judges blocked the policy.

The Supreme Court lifted the injunctions by a 5-4 vote in 2019, allowing the revised injunction to take effect as legal challenges move forward. After Mr. Trump resigned, the case was revoked and Mr. Biden revoked the ban.

In a Thursday application, the Justice allowed the trans force policy in 2019 to be the same as the new one.

Challengers disputed this, saying earlier policies allowed active-duty soldiers to transition to the armed forces, and Mr. Trump's new policies did not. They added that earlier policies “lack new language”, which they said derogatory “trans people are inherently unreal, undisciplined, dishonest, selfish, selfish, arrogant, arrogant, arrogant, incapable of meeting strict military service standards”.