...
By Sonam Sheth
Evening Politics Editor
0
Share
Newsweek is a Trust Project member
See more of our trusted coverage when you search.Prefer Newsweek on Googleto see more of our trusted coverage when you search.
A federal judge on Tuesday tore into the Trump administration over a recent executive order regarding transgender military service members.
The Context
President Donald Trump's executive order, signed on January 27, directed the Pentagon to update its guidance "regarding trans-identifying medical standards for military service and to rescind guidance inconsistent with military readiness."
Read More on Politics
The order claimed the military has been afflicted with "radical gender ideology" and that transgender people "cannot satisfy the rigorous standards necessary for military service."
After Trump signed the order, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth issued a memo saying that transgender people would no longer be allowed to enlist in the military. He said people with gender dysphoria who are already in the military will be "treated with dignity and respect" and that the undersecretary of defense for personnel and readiness would provide additional details.
Six transgender service members and two who hope to join the military sued the Trump administration over the order, arguing that banning them from service violates the U.S. Constitution.
A Gallup poll conducted from January 21-27, 2025, of 1,001 adults 18+ living in all 50 states and D.C., "showed 58 percent continue to favor allowing openly transgender men and women to serve in the U.S. military, but support has declined from 71 percent in 2019 and 66 percent in 2021." The margin of sampling error was ±4 percentage points.
...
What To Know
U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes was deeply skeptical of Trump's executive order while hearing arguments in the case on Tuesday.
"You and I both agree that the greatest fighting force that world history has ever seen is not going to be impacted in any way by less than one percent of the soldiers using a different pronoun than others might want to call them," Reyes said while addressing Justice Department lawyer Jason Lynch. "Would you agree with that?"
"No, your honor, I'm not," Lynch replied. "I can't agree with that."
Reyes, who was nominated by President Joe Biden, also criticized the language in the executive order as being purposely vague and excoriated the directive for targeting transgender people.
Trump's order "calls an entire category of people dishonest, dishonorable, undisciplined, immodest, who lack integrity, people who have taken an oath to defend this country, people who have been under fire, people who have received medals for taking fire for this country," Reyes said. "I want to know from the government whether that language expresses animus. Does that express animus?"
"Not in any constitutional—" the DOJ's lawyer began, before Reyes cut him off.
"In any common sense way," she said. "This is a policy from the President of the United States affecting thousands of people ... to call an entire group of people lying, dishonest people, who are undisciplined, immodest and have no integrity. How is that anything other than showing animus?"
"I don't have an answer for you," Lynch said.
"You do have an answer," the judge said. "You just don't want to give it."
Reyes also scoffed at the suggestion that pronoun usage affects military readiness.
"Would you agree with me that if our military is negatively impacted" by the use of pronouns, "we all have a lot bigger problems than pronoun use?" she said. If that's the case, then "our military is incompetent," Reyes added.
"It is pretext," she said of Trump's order. "It is frankly ridiculous."
"If you can get me an officer of the United States military to get on the stand and say that because of pronoun usage, we are less prepared, I will be the first to buy you a box of cigars," Reyes said.
In another back-and-forth with Lynch, the judge pushed him to acknowledge that transgender service members who filed the lawsuit make the country safer.
"Are they honorable, truthful and disciplined?" Reyes asked. "As far as I know, among them, they have over 60 years of military service."
"That's correct," Lynch said.
"And you would agree that together, the plaintiffs have made America safer?" she pressed.
"I would agree, yes," Lynch replied.
What People Are Saying
The plaintiffs said in their lawsuit: "President Trump's Order breaks faith with transgender service members who relied on their government's promise that they could serve their country on equal terms with others. The ban is an irrational and prejudicial attack on service members who have risked their lives to serve their country. It is manifestly unconstitutional, as it violates Plaintiffs' Fifth Amendment right to equal protection."
The Trump administration urged Reyes to deny the plaintiffs' request for an injunction, saying in a filing last week that Trump's executive order would likely be upheld by the Supreme Court: The court has "long recognized that military policies can and must account for the distinct immutable biological characteristics of the sexes."
What Happens Next
Arguments in the case will continue on Wednesday.
The Pentagon has not yet issued its final guidance on transgender people serving in the military, but the policy is expected to be formalized in the next week.
Reyes said during Tuesday's hearing that for now, she'll hold off on issuing a ruling.
"Smarter people on the D.C. circuit would have to tell me I'm wrong," she said.
View 0 Comments
Submit Correction
View Editorial & AI Guidelines