Trump administration’s ban on trans people serving in the military takes effect after delays and courts’ controversial challenge Ministry of National Defense (Ministry of National Defense) policy.
US District Judge Ana Reyes, located in DC Biden’s appointmentpresided over the March 21 hearing, and she asked the department to delay its initial March 26 deadline to develop the policy.
Reyes said she wanted to leave more time for the appeal process. She also said she had had enough time before to appeal her early opinions to prevent the ban from going into effect.
“I don’t want to block the DC track. That’s my main focus,” Reyes said during a March 21 hearing. “My Chambers worked very hard to give his opinion.”
Second judge opposes Trump’s ruling to remove transgender troops
President Donald Trump posed for a photo with Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth. The Department of Defense bans trans people serving in the military and is scheduled to take effect on Friday. (Getty Image)
Reyes gave the government a 3pm deadline on the same day to return her request for a deadline.
The government responded that he agreed to postpone the March 26 deadline to March 28.
The legal challenge is because the U.S. Supreme Court also considered high-profile cases involving trans rights. In this case, the question for the United States and Skrmetti is whether the equal protection clause requires the government to treat the same position, prohibiting states from allowing it. Medical provider Provide pubertal blockers and hormones to assist minors in transitioning to another gender.
However, it was not until May or June that the High Court ruling was expected.
“Skrmetti’s decision will occupy a lot of areas here and provide some guidance. So, I doubt if the DC Tour will feel the need to be urgent,” Charles Stimson, senior legal researcher at Heritage Foundation told Fox News Digital.
“If I were sitting on the DC Tour and all of my other cases would come up and I was on the three judges panel, I don’t think it would be the top of me.”
Washington, D.C.-based U.S. District Court Judge Ana Reyes, a Biden-appointed man, held a hearing on March 21 and asked the Department of Defense to delay its initial March 26 deadline. (via YouTube Getty/Senatordurbin)
Despite the imminent deadline, Stemson said the injunction will be “suspended” when the parties operate through the appeal process.
“I don’t think the secretary will do anything against the court order,” Stemson said. “You’re wise to do it even if they don’t agree with that.”
Trump administrator demands federal judges to dissolve the ban, ban trans military ban
Reyes issued a preliminary injunction on March 18 in support of the plaintiff. Constitutional Rightswhich constitutes irreparable harm “will guarantee a preliminary ban.”
On March 21, the defendants in the lawsuit include the president Donald Trump Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has filed a motion to disband the ban that blocks the Pentagon ban. The document argues that the policy is not an overall ban, but rather “development of gender irritability (a medical condition) and does not discriminate against transgender people for the class.”
On March 21, the defendants in the lawsuit included President Donald Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, filed a motion to disband the injunction that blocked the Pentagon ban. (Reuters/Yves Hermann)
The Trump administration further demands that the court should maintain a preliminary injunction pending appeal if the motion to dissolution is rejected.
The government cited new guidelines released on March 21 and is expected to be formulated instead of for ongoing litigation. The guide clarifies that the “phrase” exhibits symptoms consistent with gender irritability” only applies to people who “express sufficient symptoms to constitute a diagnosis. ”
In a motion to dissolve the March 18 ban, the government wrote that the March 21 guide constitutes a “significant change” that would be necessary Court Dissolution of the ban.
On request, a party requiring the dissolution of the preliminary injunction must indicate a “significant change in factual conditions or law” indicating that continuing to execute the order would be “harmful to the public interest”.
“On March 21, 2025, the guidelines constitute a ‘significant change’,” the application states. “While the court has extensively explained the scope of the Department of Defense policy to cover all transgenders who cross identifying service members or applicants, the new guidance emphasizes the accused’s consistent position that the Department of Defense policy is related to military readiness, deployability and cost, and is related to medical conditions – and each previous government is not a military force to some extent.”
Fox News’s Jake Gibson contributed to the report.
