President Trump will leave after speaking with a reporter for the Grand Foyer on Monday while on a tour at the John F. Kennedy Center for Performing Arts.
ChipSomodevilla/Getty Images
Hide captions
Toggle caption
ChipSomodevilla/Getty Images
A federal judge in Washington, DC has issued a provisional injunction against the Trump administration against attempts to ban transgender forces from serving the US military.
Tuesday’s decision by US District Judge Ana C. Reyes temporarily blocks the Department of Defense from carrying policy directives designed to remove transgender service members from the military.
In a large and sometimes strongly expressed opinion, Reyes opposed the regime’s efforts and wrote that the ban violated the constitutional rights of transgender forces.

“Indeed, the cruel irony is that thousands of transgender soldiers have sacrificed what risks their lives in order to ensure that others have a very equal right of protection that the ban seeks to deny them,” Reyes writes.
The preliminary injunction is the latest example of a federal court moving to suspend or block efforts to enact his agenda through enforcement actions. A steady cascade of orders against the president raised fear among Trump critics that the administration may choose to induce a potential constitutional crisis against a federal court decision.
Trump said he would appeal a ruling against the administration and pledged to comply with the court’s decision. At the same time, he was openly critical of the federal judge who ruled him.

There are approximately 1.3 million military officers. The Department of Defense told NPR that an estimated 4,240 active service members, or less than 1% of units, have gender discomfort. But others have higher numbers. Palm Center, a research institute that advocates the inclusion of LGBTQ+ in the US military; Estimated in 2018 The number of transgender forces was around 14,700.
This challenge was brought by six trans service members and two future service members in response to January 27th. Presidential Order It sought to instruct the pentagon to prohibit transgender forces from serving the military and announce plans to carry it out within 30 days.
The executive order describes transgender identity as harmful to military preparation, writing that “the military suffers from fundamental gender ideology to appease activists who are indifferent to military service requirements such as physical and mental health, selflessness, and unit unit cohesion.”
It is the language that Reyes had problems with her decision.
“The president highlights his duties to ensure military readiness,” she wrote. “However, sometimes leaders use concerns of military preparation to deny the privilege of service to marginalized people.”
In February, the Pentagon moved to begin implementing orders Policy Notes Describes a service member or applicant for a service that has an incompatible condition or is showing symptoms that are present in or show symptoms that are consistent with gender discomfort.”
The policy directive identifies service members with gender discomfort or history and called for new steps to “initiate separation actions.”
On the 2024 campaign trail, Trump took a serious stance on several issues relating to transgender Americans.
In addition to his military service restrictions pledge, Trump has sought to track promises from many of his campaigns. He signed an executive order aimed at banning transgender people from participating in women’s sports, ending the use of gender-affirming healthcare for children and teenagers, requiring that the government recognizes only two genders.
Part of this action has fallen into veterans. On Monday, the Department of Veterans Affairs announced it would reduce access to treatment for veterans with gender discomfort.
Tuesday’s decision was celebrated by Glad Law, one of two LGBTQ+ legal organizations representing the plaintiffs in the case.
“Today’s decisive ruling will tell you a lot of talk,” said Jennifer Levy, the delighted senior director of transgender and queer rights. “The court’s clear findings of facts exposed the way that this ban specifically targets and undermines our brave service members who have committed to protecting our country.”