President Donald Trump's administration faces a legal battle over its latest attempt to restrict transgender individuals from serving in the U.S. military.
According to SCOTUSblog, U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer petitioned the Supreme Court on Thursday to allow enforcement of a Department of Defense policy that would prohibit transgender individuals from military service, following a nationwide injunction issued by a federal judge.
The controversy stems from Trump's January 20 executive order that reversed former President Joe Biden's policy permitting transgender service members to serve openly. The new directive instructed Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to implement restrictions on individuals with gender dysphoria, leading to a February policy that largely disqualifies transgender personnel from military service.
Commander Emily Shilling, a decorated naval aviator with 19 years of service and over 60 combat missions, spearheads the legal challenge as the lead plaintiff. The Navy has invested approximately $20 million in her training, and she began her transition in fall 2021.
Seven other plaintiffs, including current service members and one potential recruit, joined the lawsuit arguing the policy violates constitutional equal protection guarantees. U.S. District Judge Benjamin Settle agreed with their position on March 27.
The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals subsequently declined to stay Judge Settle's nationwide injunction while the government pursued its appeal.
Solicitor General Sauer emphasized findings from a Trump administration expert panel that suggested allowing transgender service members would undermine military effectiveness. He argued the policy targets a medical condition rather than gender identity.
According to Sauer's Supreme Court filing:
The government has undisputedly important interests in maintaining military readiness, cohesion, good order, and discipline, as well as in managing the military's costs.
The administration contends the policy requires only rational basis review, the least stringent constitutional standard, which they believe it easily meets.
The Trump administration also challenged the broad scope of Judge Settle's nationwide injunction, arguing such sweeping orders exceed federal court authority and harm government operations.
Sauer requested that, at minimum, the Supreme Court narrow the injunction to protect only the eight individual plaintiffs rather than all transgender service members and recruits nationwide. He cited a 2019 Supreme Court decision allowing enforcement of a similar Trump-era policy.
The justices have given the challengers until May 1 to respond to the government's emergency application.
The Trump administration's request to the Supreme Court marks another chapter in the ongoing debate over transgender military service. The case centers on Commander Shilling and seven other plaintiffs who challenged the Defense Department's February 2025 policy barring most transgender individuals from serving. While the government argues the restrictions protect military readiness and effectiveness, opponents contend they violate constitutional equal protection rights. The Supreme Court's response to the emergency application, due after the May 1 deadline for challengers' arguments, could determine whether the nationwide injunction remains in place during continued litigation.
