A federal judge in New Jersey has blocked the discharge of two transgender airmen, temporarily halting part of the Trump administration’s policy on transgender military service.
Key Takeaways
- U.S. District Judge Christine O’Hearn granted a preliminary injunction protecting two transgender Air Force members from being discharged
- The ruling follows another injunction from U.S. District Judge Ana C. Reyes in Washington D.C. against the broader transgender military ban
- The Pentagon had begun implementing President Trump’s executive order by directing military leaders to identify transgender service members for separation
- The Defense Department estimates 4,240 active duty service members have gender dysphoria, while advocacy groups estimate about 14,700 transgender troops serve
- A 2016 RAND Corp. study found no negative impact from allowing transgender individuals to serve openly
New Jersey Court Decision Protects Two Airmen
Master Sgt. Logan Ireland and Staff Sgt. Nicholas Bear Bade received temporary protection from a New Jersey federal court, blocking their discharge from the U.S. Air Force under President Trump’s recent executive order on transgender military service. Judge Christine O’Hearn ruled that the airmen would face severe harm without the preliminary injunction, noting the defendants failed to show a compelling justification for immediate implementation of the orders. Both service members have exemplary records, having served in various international deployments during their military careers.
The airmen had been placed on administrative absence, which their lawsuit claimed was stigmatizing. They argued that the executive orders subjected them to unequal and demeaning treatment by recognizing only two sexes and barring transgender individuals from serving openly. Ireland and Bade specifically challenged the implementation of these orders by acting Air Force Secretary Gary Ashworth and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth.
Broader Federal Court Challenge
The New Jersey ruling adds to mounting legal challenges against the Trump administration’s transgender military policy. Earlier, U.S. District Judge Ana C. Reyes in Washington D.C. issued a separate preliminary injunction against the broader ban. That case involved six transgender service members and two prospective service members who challenged the January 27 executive order, which claimed transgender identity was harmful to military readiness. Reyes criticized the language of the order in her ruling.
“Indeed, the cruel irony is that thousands of transgender servicemembers have sacrificed — some risking their lives – to ensure for others the very equal protection rights the Military Ban seeks to deny them.” – Reyes
The Pentagon had already begun implementing the order through a policy memo labeling gender dysphoria as “incompatible” with military service. Military leaders were instructed to identify transgender service members and begin separation actions. President Trump has pledged to appeal court rulings against his administration but has also criticized judges who rule against him.
Defense Department Data and Research
According to Defense Department estimates, approximately 4,240 active duty service members have gender dysphoria, while the Palm Center, a research institute, estimates about 14,700 transgender troops are currently serving. Notably, a 2016 RAND Corporation study commissioned by the Pentagon found no negative impact on military effectiveness, readiness, or unit cohesion from allowing transgender individuals to serve openly in the armed forces.
“The President has the power—indeed the obligation—to ensure military readiness. At times, however, leaders have used concern for military readiness to deny marginalized persons the privilege of serving.” – Reyes
Beyond military service restrictions, the Trump administration has taken additional steps affecting transgender Americans. The Department of Veterans Affairs recently announced reduced access to medical treatment for veterans with gender dysphoria, further limiting healthcare options for transgender veterans. These policy changes mark a significant shift from previous administrations that had moved toward more inclusive military service policies.
Advocacy Groups Celebrate Rulings
LGBTQ advocacy organizations have celebrated both court rulings. Jennifer Levi from GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders, representing the New Jersey plaintiffs, expressed relief at the court’s decision, emphasizing the political nature of the ban and the service members’ contributions to national defense. Similarly, GLAD Law, representing the Washington D.C. plaintiffs, highlighted the ruling’s significance in defending transgender service members’ constitutional rights.
“Today’s decisive ruling speaks volumes. 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.” – Jennifer Levi
Both cases represent part of a series of federal court actions pausing or blocking President Trump’s executive actions. The administration will likely appeal these decisions as the legal battles over transgender military service continue through the court system. For now, the injunctions provide temporary protection for transgender service members while the cases proceed toward final resolution.
Sources:
- Pentagon Blocked From Dismissing 2 Trans Airmen
- Federal court blocks Trump administration from separating 2 transgender airmen
