Federal Court Rejects Another Trump Administration Attempt to Implement the Transgender Military Ban and Reinstates Nationwide Preliminary Injunction

Lead attorneys for the plaintiffs say military families face a “crushing amount of pressure” and that the motion to dissolve was “nothing more than a disingenuous, last-ditch tactic to sow confusion and cause delay”

U.S. District Court Judge Ana Reyes today rejected a Trump administration motion to dissolve the 全国初步禁令 issued in 塔尔博特诉特朗普案. Judge Reyes issued the injunction on March 18 in a forceful order in which she held that the ban undermines national security and is likely unconstitutional, calling it “soaked with animus and dripping with pretext.” Defendants filed the motion to dissolve on March 21.

In her opinion today, Judge Reyes denied Defendants’ motion, holding that “Defendants cannot evade discriminating against transgender people simply by labeling the policy as addressing gender dysphoria.” Judge Reyes also denied Defendants’ request that she stay her preliminary injunction while the case proceeds.  

As a result of today’s decision, Judge Reyes’ order blocking the government from enforcing the ban will take effect at 7 p.m. on Friday, March 28. That injunction halts implementation of the ban and protects transgender servicemembers and recruits from its significant harms while the future of the ban is being decided in court. These harms include servicemembers being removed from deployments, denied commissions and promotions, placed on administrative leave, denied medically needed care, and ultimately being placed in involuntary separation proceedings, a process used to address instances of misconduct.

The lead attorneys in 塔尔博特诉特朗普案, GLAD Law 跨性别者和酷儿权利高级总监 詹妮弗·莱维 和 NCLR法律总监 香农·明特, respond to Judge Reyes’ ruling:

“These efforts to stall the preliminary injunction from going into effect to protect our transgender troops burden military families with a crushing amount of pressure as they navigate a limbo with outcomes that will cause devastating harms to the military careers of these incredible soldiers,” said GLAD Law 跨性别者和酷儿权利高级总监 Jennifer Levi. “It is unthinkable that we would treat this way the brave individuals who sacrifice so much for our country.”

“This motion was nothing more than a last-ditch tactic to sow confusion and cause delay. There is no way to defend a policy that seeks to recklessly discard thousands of highly trained, skilled, and decorated transgender servicemembers, many of whom have deployed to critical locations across the globe. The government has conceded it has no evidence to support its position and no reason to discharge individuals who are serving capably and honorably,” said NCLR法律总监Shannon Minter.

塔尔博特诉特朗普案 was the first legal challenge filed against President Trump’s recent transgender military ban executive order. The case is on behalf of 32 plaintiffs and was brought by LGBTQ+ legal groups GLAD Law and NCLR with pro bono legal counsel from Wardenski P.C. and Kropf Moseley PLCC.

GLAD Law’s Jennifer Levi and NCLR’s Shannon Minter, the 本案首席律师, are transgender themselves and each have more than three decades of experience litigating landmark and key LGBTQ+ cases. Together, Levi and Minter led the legal fight in 2017 against the transgender military ban in 多伊诉特朗普案 和 斯托克曼诉特朗普案该公司还获得了全国范围内的初步禁令，以阻止该禁令的实施。

详细了解 塔尔博特诉特朗普案.