Trump order banning transgender people from serving in military blocked by federal judge
A federal judge blocked President Donald Trump's executive order banning transgender people from military service on Tuesday.
The judge said the order likely violates transgender people's constitutional rights.
The plaintiffs who sued to block the order include an Army Reserves platoon leader, an Army major and a sailor in the Navy.
WASHINGTON - A federal judge on Tuesday blocked President Donald Trump's executive order banning transgender people from serving in the military.
U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes in Washington, D.C., ruled that Trump's order to exclude transgender troops from serving likely violates their constitutional rights.
She delayed her order by three days to give the administration time to appeal.
The judge issued a preliminary injunction requested by attorneys for six transgender people who are active-duty service members and two others seeking to join the military.
Plaintiffs' attorneys contend Trump's order violates transgender people's rights to equal protection under the Fifth Amendment.
The plaintiffs who sued to block Trump's order include an Army Reserves platoon leader from Pennsylvania, an Army major who was awarded a Bronze Star for service in Afghanistan and a Sailor of the Year award winner serving in the Navy.
Their attorneys, from the National Center for Lesbian Rights and GLAD Law, said transgender troops "seek nothing more than the opportunity to continue dedicating their lives to defending the Nation."
What they're saying
"Yet these accomplished servicemembers are now subject to an order that says they must be separated from the military based on a characteristic that has no bearing on their proven ability to do the job," plaintiffs' attorneys wrote. "This is a stark and reckless reversal of policy that denigrates honorable transgender servicemembers, disrupts unit cohesion, and weakens our military."
Plaintiffs' attorneys say Trump's order fits his administration's pattern of discriminating against transgender people.
The other side
Government lawyers argue that military officials have broad discretion to decide how to assign and deploy servicemembers without judicial interference.
Attorneys also said the Defense Department has a history of disqualifying people from military service if they have physical or emotional impairments, including mental health conditions.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth issued a policy that presumptively disqualifies people with gender dysphoria from military service. Gender dysphoria is the distress that a person feels because their assigned gender and gender identity don't match. The medical condition has been linked to depression and suicidal thoughts.
Hegseth's Feb. 26 policy says service members or applicants for military service who have "a current diagnosis or history of, or exhibit symptoms consistent with, gender dysphoria are incompatible with the high mental and physical standards necessary for military service."
Dig deeper
In February, the U.S. Army confirmed its policy shift following the president's signed executive order.
The order cited concerns that transgender service members' identities conflict "with a soldier's commitment to an honorable, truthful, and disciplined lifestyle." The administration argues that gender dysphoria, a condition of distress caused by a mismatch between assigned sex and gender identity, presents a medical readiness issue.
The backstory
This is not the first time the U.S. military has restricted transgender service members. In 2017, Trump announced a ban on transgender individuals serving in the military, which was later reversed by President Joe Biden in 2021.
Under Biden's policy, openly transgender individuals were allowed to serve, receive gender-affirming care, and transition while in service. With the latest executive order, the Trump administration has reversed that approach, effectively reinstating a ban on new transgender enlistees.
The Source
Information for this article was gathered from The Associated Press and previous reporting by LiveNOW from FOX. This story was reported from Los Angeles.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
19 minutes ago
- Forbes
Five Reasons Trump Should Think Twice About Firing Fed Chair Powell
WASHINGTON, DC - NOVEMBER 02: (L to R) U.S. President Donald Trump walks with his nominee for the ... More chairman of the Federal Reserve Jerome Powell on their way to a press event in the Rose Garden at the White House, November 2, 2017 in Washington, DC. (Photo by) It's no secret that Donald Trump does not like how Jerome Powell is managing the Fed and monetary policy. Despite nominating Powell for the job of Fed Chair in 2017, the President lambasts Powell (who Trump has nicknamed Mr. Too Late) every time the Fed's Federal Open Markets Committee meets and doesn't cut interest rates. But President Trump should think again if he thinks getting rid of Powell will get him what he wants. While the President is desperate for the Fed to cut interest rates, firing Powell before his term ends in eight months is no guarantee that rates would drop, and his departure would also likely rattle the financial markets. Below are the top five reasons why it's in the President's interest to let Powell finish his term as Fed Chair: 5. The President will probably lose the case in court. Section 10 of the Federal Reserve Act, states the president can remove any member of the Fed's Board of Governors 'for cause,' such as neglect of duty, corruption, or inefficiency. But the head of the Fed cannot be removed for policy differences such as when to cut the Federal Funds Rate. This is why the Department of Justice is pushing forward with the investigation into the renovations of the Federal Reserve's headquarters and whether it has been mismanaged. But Powell would likely fight any attempt to remove him, and without strong evidence of fraud, the court would either dismiss, or issue an injunction. This could allow Powell to stay on the job until his term ends in May of 2026. 4. If Powell is fired a Biden appointee will take over the Fed, temporarily. If the courts don't block the President from firing Powell, then Fed Vice Chair Philip Jefferson would become responsible for running the central bank until the Senate confirmed a new one. Jefferson was appointed by former President Joe Biden in 2022, and as acting Fed Chair would likely stay the course on interest rates assuming no major changes in economic conditions. Jefferson would also be in charge of other policy matters, regulating banks, and the management of the Fed offices and staff. 3. The markets will react negatively. The stock market has been on a roller roaster ride since Trump re-entered office on January 20th. After steep losses in the first quarter of 2025, the market has largely recovered in response to the President's retreat from his Liberation Day tariffs. But firing Powell would likely set the markets into a tailspin again. Poll after poll has shown that the financial sector doesn't want Trump to push Powell out. And leading bankers have been offering Powell support and warning of a market backlash should he be dismissed. Trump loves to cite a bullish market a sign he is managing the economy well. He would likely lose that message if he fires Powell. 2. Powell is historically good at his job. Since 1954, the Federal Reserve Board's policy-making Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) has raised interest rates in a series of recurring steps 13 times. In five of them, the Fed has done this without putting the U.S. economy into a tailspin (soft landing), including twice under the leadership of Powell. No other Fed Chair has achieved this feat more than once. Furthermore, Powell and the Fed's steady hand have countered the market anxiety created by the President's aggressive trade policy. 1. Trump will lose his favorite economic scapegoat. Many economists continue to predict that the U.S. economy will slow down given a number of headwinds: the President's push for higher tariffs; layoffs of federal employees and contractors (135,000 firings and early retirements of federal employees, and tens of thousands of contractors to date); and the flood of additional federal debt created by the recently enacted Big Beautiful Bill (BBB). Economic growth and job creation has slowed since Trump took office, with GDP contracting .5% in the first quarter of 2025. And there are some signs that inflation is starting to bubble up. Firing Powell would make it difficult to use him as a scapegoat should the economy go belly up.
USA Today
20 minutes ago
- USA Today
Trump to sign order pushing cities and states to remove homeless people from streets
Amid record high homelessness, Trump wants to move homeless people from the streets and into treatment centers. WASHINGTON ― President Donald Trump is set to take executive action that looks to make it easier for cities and states to remove homeless people from the streets. Under an executive order Trump is prepared to sign on July 24, the president will direct Attorney General Pam Bondi to "reverse judicial precedents and end consent decrees" that limit local and state governments' ability to move homeless people from streets and encampments into treatment centers, according to a White House summary of the order reviewed by USA TODAY. Trump's signature will redirect federal funds to ensure the homeless people impacted are transferred to rehabilitation, treatment and other facilities, the White House said, though it was not immediately clear how much money would be allocated. More: In major decision, Supreme Court allows cities to ban homeless camps The order, which the White House has dubbed "Ending Vagrancy and Restoring Order," further requires Bondi to work with the secretaries of Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development and Transportation to prioritize federal grants to states and cities that "enforce prohibitions on open illicit drug use, urban camping and loitering, and urban squatting, and track the location of sex offenders." White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt, in a statement to USA TODAY, said Trump is "delivering on his commitment to Make America Safe Again and end homelessness across America." "By removing vagrant criminals from our streets and redirecting resources toward substance abuse programs, the Trump Administration will ensure that Americans feel safe in their own communities and that individuals suffering from addiction or mental health struggles are able to get the help they need," Leavitt said. More: The average American is closer to being homeless than being Elon Musk Trump's action follows major Supreme Court decision on homeless camps Trump's action comes after the Supreme Court ruled in June that that people without homes can be arrested and fined for sleeping in public spaces, overturning a lower court's ruling that enforcing camping bans when shelter is lacking is cruel and unusual punishment. The 6-3 decision, split among ideological lines in the conservative-majority court, upheld a ban in Grant Pass, Oregon, prohibiting homeless residents from sleeping outdoors. Homeless residents of the southern Oregon city of 38,000 face fines starting at $250 and jail time for repeat offenses. More: Homelessness rates jumped by double digits in 2024 as Americans battled to afford housing Across the U.S., more than 771,800 people lived without housing in 2024, according to a HUD count taken annually on a single night in January. It was the highest tally ever recorded, a 18.1% jump than in 2023, when officials counted about 650,000 people living in homeless shelters or in parks and on streets. Many cities have struggled to build more affordable housing in recent years, while some communities have pushed for harsher laws banning tents and sleeping in public spaces. More: The homeless population is increasing. Will Trump's second term make it worse? Trump has often expressed his distaste of homeless camps, singling out the removal of encampments on parks and federal land in Washington as a priority. Trump, in a 2023 campaign video, said: "We will use every tool, lever, and authority to get the homeless off our streets. We want to take care of them, but they have to be off our streets' Others items in Trump's order include language that seeks to ensure that grants intended for substance use disorder prevention and recovery don't fund drug injection sites or illicit drug use. The White House said the order also prohibits convicted sex offenders who receive homeless assistance from being housed with children and supports new homeless programs to exclusively house women and children. Reach Joey Garrison on X @joeygarrison.
San Francisco Chronicle
20 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Trump's settlement with Columbia could become a model for his campaign to reshape higher education
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Trump administration's milestone settlement with Columbia promises to bring stability to a university in crisis. It also delivers a crucial win to President Donald Trump in his campaign to reshape higher education. And at colleges around the country, the deal clarifies the stakes for anyone weighing whether to fight the administration's demands or concede. Columbia agreed Wednesday to pay more than $220 million to the federal government to restore federal research money that was canceled in the name of combating antisemitism on campus. That decision offers a contrast to the path taken by Harvard University, which has lost billions of dollars in government funding as its legal battle escalates with no end in sight. Yet the Columbia deal also raises questions about university independence as the school submits to closer federal oversight. No sooner had Trump announced the deal than he sent a warning: Numerous other universities, he said, 'are upcoming.' The deal is the first to settle a federal investigation into allegations of campus antisemitism since Trump returned to office. It's also the first agreement with a university touching on so many elements of the president's agenda, including diversity, equity and inclusion programs and admissions to women's sports and campus protests. Columbia agreed to some provisions similar to those that Harvard rejected and called a dangerous precedent. The settlement requires the hiring of new faculty in Jewish studies and a review of academics to ensure 'balance.' Additionally, Columbia will be placed under the watch of an independent monitor and ordered to disclose hiring, admission and discipline data to be audited for compliance. In what Columbia described as a victory for university autonomy, the agreement includes a clause saying the government has no authority to dictate hiring, admissions decisions or the content of academic speech. Acting University President Claire Shipman said it was 'carefully crafted to protect the values that define us' while restoring the university's federal research funding. Where some see pragmatism, others see capitulation Some at Columbia called it the best feasible outcome. Some called it capitulation. Rep. Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y., a Columbia graduate whose district includes the Manhattan campus, called it a 'cowardly' agreement that won't improve the campus. Columbia has effectively waved "the white flag of surrender in its battle at the heart of the Trump Administration's war on higher education and academic freedom,' Nadler said. Columbia had been threatened with the potential loss of billions of dollars in government support, including more than $400 million in research grants canceled earlier this year. David Pozen, a law professor at Columbia, said the settlement raises legal questions about Trump's strategy of regulation by dealmaking. Instead of applying a single standard across all of higher education, Pozen said, Trump is relying on one-off deals with individual universities as a condition to regain federal funding. It mirrors his hardball approach with trade partners and prominent law firms. 'In short, the agreement gives legal form to an extortion scheme,' he said. Lawrence Summers, a former Treasury secretary and former president of Harvard, called the settlement an 'excellent template' for agreements with Harvard and other universities. He said it preserves Columbia's independence while addressing antisemitism and renewing a focus on merit. 'This may be the best day higher education has had in the last year,' Summers wrote on the social media platform X. Dozens of colleges are facing federal investigations With the deal, Trump has new momentum in his expanding campaign to bring the nation's universities in line with his vision. Dozens of campuses are under federal investigation for allegations related to antisemitism, DEI and transgender athletes in women's sports. Trump has saved his strongest rebuke for elite private universities, yet his administration has also recently turned attention to big public universities including George Mason University. Among Trump's backers, the Columbia agreement is seen as a first step to counteract the liberal bias they say has permeated college campuses. Education Secretary Linda McMahon called Columbia's reforms a roadmap for universities looking to regain public trust. 'I believe they will ripple across the higher education sector and change the course of campus culture for years to come,' McMahon said in a statement. The settlement follows smaller wins for the administration, including a recent deal with the University of Pennsylvania over transgender swimmer Lia Thomas. Penn agreed to modify school records held by Thomas and to apologize to female athletes 'disadvantaged' by Thomas' participation. Just days earlier, the president of the University of Virginia agreed to resign amid a Justice Department investigation over DEI policies. Dozens of university presidents have rallied behind Harvard in its fight against the Trump administration, seeing their own independence jeopardized by the government's sanctions against the Ivy League school. Harvard, the nation's oldest and wealthiest university, is often seen as a bellwether for other institutions, and some regard it as the best hope to repel the Trump administration's pressure campaign. Now even more rides on Harvard's case. Earlier this month, Trump said a deal with Harvard appeared imminent, only to lash out at the university this week following a court hearing in one of Harvard's legal battles. 'A big part of it is going to be how much Harvard gets in the future,' Trump told reporters this week. 'And they're not going to get very much.' Even before Trump took office, more universities had been pulling back on DEI and taking other steps to backtrack on what some see as a leftward political drift. Yet if the Columbia agreement becomes a model, it could force an even deeper reckoning. The agreement requires full compliance with the administration's interpretation of Title IX, the federal law barring sex discrimination in education. Trump officials have used the law to force the removal of transgender athletes from women's sports. The deal also requires regular reports to ensure Columbia does not 'promote unlawful DEI goals.' On admissions, the settlement pushes Columbia to limit the consideration of race even beyond the Supreme Court's 2023 decision ending affirmative action. That decision left open the possibility that universities could consider an applicant's discussion of how their race affected their life, including in college application essays. The Columbia deal appears to bar such considerations. It also requires Columbia to heighten scrutiny of international students and ask questions about their reasons for wanting to study in the United States. It orders the school to take steps to 'decrease financial independence' on international students. Columbia has one of the largest international student populations in the nation, making up about 40% of its enrollment. How much Columbia ceded in exchange may not be clear for years. There's also no guarantee that the school is fully in the clear — the agreement leaves open the possibility of future 'compliance reviews, investigations, defunding or litigation' by the government. Still, Trump commended the university for doing 'what is right.' 'I look forward to watching them have a great future in our Country, maybe greater than ever before!' he said on his social media platform. ___
