U.S. District Court Judge Ana Reyes recently issued a nationwide preliminary injunction in Talbott v. Trump, the legal challenge to Donald Trump’s executive ordered transgender military ban. Judge Reyes heard arguments on the motion for preliminary injunction in Washington, DC on Wednesday, March 12.
In the ruling, Reyes noted that “thousands of transgender service members have sacrificed – some risking their lives – to ensure for others the very equal protection rights the Military Ban seeks to deny them.” Reyes also confirmed the ban violates equal protection because it both discriminates based on transgender status and sex; and because “it is soaked in animus.”
“Its language is unabashedly demeaning,” Reyes stated. “Its policy stigmatizes transgender persons as inherently unfit, and its conclusions bear no relation to fact.”
This nationwide preliminary injunction will temporarily halt implementation of the ban and protect transgender service members and recruits from its significant harms while the future of the ban is being decided in court. Cited damages include the delay or denial of essential medical care, paused deployments, forced administrative leave and other significant harms including what would eventually result in the end of these individuals’ military careers by being discharged through administrative separation, a process used to address instances of misconduct.
Lead attorneys on the case, GLAD Law Senior Director of Transgender and Queer Rights Jennifer Levi; and NCLR Legal Director Shannon Minter respond to Judge Reyes’ ruling:
“Today’s decisive ruling speaks volumes,” said GLAD Law Senior Director of Transgender and Queer Rights Jennifer Levi. “The Court’s unambiguous factual findings lay bare how this ban specifically targets and undermines our courageous service members who have committed themselves to defending our nation. Given the Court’s clear-eyed assessment, we are confident this ruling will stand strong on appeal.”
“The court acted quickly today to shield our troops from the harmful effects of this irrational ban. It would have ended careers of dedicated transgender servicemembers and created personnel gaps, leaving others to fill critical roles. The ban’s harmful impact and rushed implementation show that it was motivated by prejudice,” said NCLR Legal Director Shannon Minter. “Our plaintiffs include lifelong military personnel who served in combat in Afghanistan, come from multi-generation military families, and have received honors like the Bronze Star. This ban is unjustifiable and attacks brave servicemembers, recruits, and families who sacrifice so much for our country.”
GLAD (GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders) Law’s Jennifer Levi and NCLR’s (National Center for Lesbian Rights) Shannon Minter, the lead attorneys in this case, are both transgender and separately 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 Doe v. Trump and Stockman v. Trump, which also secured a nationwide preliminary injunction blocking that ban.
Not unexpectedly, the case will eventually work its way through the appeals process until it lands on the door step of the United States Supreme Court, which was unevenly stacked for conservative special interest groups by Trump during his first term. Usually – but not always – its rulings reflect Trump’s lip service to his MAGA support base.
“The Court’s unambiguous factual findings lay bare how this ban specifically targets and undermines our courageous service members who have committed themselves to defending our nation,” said Levi. “Given the Court’s clear-eyed assessment, we are confident this ruling will stand strong on appeal.”
