The Trump administration’s ban on transgender people serving in the military is expected to come into effect Friday after continuing court agendas against the controversial Department of Defense (DOD) policy.
Biden’s appointee, DC-based US District Judge Ana Reyes, moderated the March 21 hearing, where the department requested that the original March 26 deadline be delayed to enact a policy.
Reyes said he wanted to allow more time for the appeal process. She also said she had allowed enough time to sue her previous opinions that had previously prevented the ban from coming into effect.
“I don’t want to pack the DC circuit, that’s my main concern here,” Reyes said at a March 21 hearing. “My room worked incredibly hard to give my opinions on time.”
Second Judge’s Rules for the removal of Trump’s transgender forces
President Donald Trump and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegses are depicted here. The Department of Defense ban on transgender people serving in the military is expected to come into effect Friday. (Getty Images)
Reyes has returned about her request to promote the deadline, giving her a 3pm deadline for the day.
The government responded that it agreed to delay the deadline for March 26th and that it had agreed to delay the deadline for March 28th.
The legal challenge is because the U.S. Supreme Court also considers well-known lawsuits dealing with transgender rights. The issue of this case, the US vs. Skrmetti, is whether an equal protection clause that requires governments to treat situational people in the same way, prohibits health care providers from allowing adolescent blockers and hormones.
Heggs proposes a judge’s report to the military base after determining that the Pentagon must allow transgender forces.
However, no decisions from the High Court are expected until May or June.
“The Skrmetti decision takes over a significant portion of the field here and provides some guidance. And I don’t think the DC circuit feels the need to hurry things up.”
“If I was sitting on the DC circuit and all the other cases were on my path and on a panel of three judges, I don’t think it would be the top of my mountain.”
Biden’s appointee, DC-based US District Judge Ana Reyes, held a hearing on March 21, demanding that the Department of Defense delay the original March 26 enactment deadline. (Getty/Senatordurbin via YouTube)
Despite the looming deadline, Stimson said the ban would be “suspended” as parties work through the appeal process.
“I don’t think the secretary is going to do anything in violation of the court order,” Stimson said. “Even if they don’t agree with it, you’d be wise to do so.”
Trump administrators ask federal judges to clear the injunction except for the transgender military ban
Reyes issued a temporary injunction in favour of the plaintiffs on March 18th. “The plaintiff in the suit “facing a violation of its constitutional rights,” and the plaintiff in the suit would guarantee a term injunction.”
On March 21, defendants in the lawsuit, including President Donald Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegses, filed a motion to resolve an injunction that obstructed the Pentagon ban. The submission argued that the policy is not a comprehensive prohibition, but that “turns on gender discomfort (sickness) and does not discriminate against trans-identifiers as class.”
On March 21, defendants in the lawsuit, including President Donald Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegses, filed a motion to resolve an injunction that obstructed the Pentagon ban. (Reuters/Yves Herman)
The Trump administration also demanded that if the dissolution motion is denied, the court should maintain a temporary injunction until appeal.
The government cited New Guidance, issued on March 21, saying it expects it to enact a policy that is not for ongoing litigation. This guidance revealed that “is only true for individuals who exhibit symptoms consistent with the phrase “gender discomfort” and “symptoms that are sufficient to constitute a diagnosis.”
In a motion calling for the dissolution of the March 18th injunction, the government wrote that the March 21st guidance constitutes a “significant change” that ensures that the courts dissolve the injunction.
Click to get the Fox News app
Under the requirements, parties requiring the dissolution of the interim injunction are required to “in practice, or in law, or to demonstrate “any significant change or law” that indicates that the ongoing enforcement of the order is “harmful to the public interest.”
“On March 21, 2025, the guidance constitutes a ‘big change’,” Filing said. “While the court broadly interprets the scope of the DOD policy to include all trans-specific military personnel or applicants, the new guidance highlights the defendant’s consistent position in which DOD policy is related to military preparation, deployment and costs associated with medical conditions.
Jake Gibson of Fox News contributed to this report.
Haley Chi-Sing is a political writer for Fox News Digital. You can contact her at X at @haleychising.
Source link
