A divided federal appeals court has ruled that the Trump administration's policy barring transgender people from military service violates the constitutional right to equal protection, largely upholding a lower court injunction that had blocked the ban. The three-judge panel of the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued its decision on Monday, though the ruling will not immediately alter military policy as legal proceedings continue.

The case centres on an executive order signed by President Donald Trump on 27 January 2025, one week into his second term, which declared that transgender identity was incompatible with military service and described those who identify as transgender as embracing a "false gender identity". Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth subsequently issued a Pentagon memorandum formally disqualifying from service anyone with gender dysphoria — the clinically recognised distress caused by a mismatch between a person's assigned and experienced gender — or anyone who had undergone hormone therapy or surgery. The lawsuit was brought by six active-duty transgender service members and two individuals seeking to enlist.

Writing for the majority, Judge Robert Wilkins, an appointee of former President Barack Obama, found the policy discriminatory and said it "appears to be driven by the bare desire to harm a politically unpopular group." He noted that the transgender plaintiffs had a combined 130 years of military service and more than 80 commendations. The majority ruling, however, narrowed an earlier injunction issued by District Judge Ana Reyes: it maintains protections for those already serving but removes the bar on excluding transgender recruits from enlistment. Judge Judith Rogers, appointed by former President Bill Clinton, agreed with the core finding but argued the protection should extend to prospective recruits as well, citing testimony that the enlistment ban would deprive the military of qualified personnel. Judge Justin Walker, a Trump appointee, dissented entirely, arguing that courts lack the authority to override decisions on military composition, a power he said the Constitution assigns to Congress and the Commander in Chief.

The ruling is unlikely to have an immediate practical effect. The appeals court has kept the preliminary injunction on hold while litigation continues, and the US Supreme Court separately allowed the transgender military ban to remain in effect last year in a related case. Defence Secretary Hegseth signalled on social media that the administration would escalate the matter, writing: "See you at SCOTUS" — a reference to the Supreme Court of the United States.

The decision nonetheless carries significant weight as the most detailed appellate scrutiny yet of the policy's constitutional foundations. LGBTQ+ advocates and Democratic lawmakers welcomed the ruling, with Representative John Larson of Connecticut calling the ban "discrimination — plain and simple." The outcome sets the stage for what is widely expected to be a definitive Supreme Court ruling on whether transgender Americans can be excluded from military service on the basis of their gender identity.