Trump's trans military ban can take effect, for now, Supreme Court says
A divided Supreme Court will allow Donald Trump 's administration to continue banning transgender service members while legal challenges against the policy continue.
An order from the nation's highest court on Tuesday freezes a lower court's injunction that blocked the administration from removing trans service members across all branches of the U.S. military.
All three liberals on the court dissent.
The president's January directive claims the 'adoption of a gender identity inconsistent with an individual's sex conflicts with a soldier's commitment to an honorable, truthful, and disciplined lifestyle, even in one's personal life.'
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Pentagon leadership subsequently ordered military officials to identify all trans troops, which 'must be completed' no later than June 25, according to a Pentagon memo. The order also immediately bans access to gender-affirming care for all trans service members.
Pentagon guidance claims that 'the medical, surgical, and mental health constraints on individuals who have a current diagnosis or history of, or exhibit symptoms consistent with, gender dysphoria are incompatible with the high mental and physical standards necessary for military service.'
During a federal court hearing in February, Washington, D.C. District Judge Ana Reyes condemned the president's 'demeaning,' 'biologically inaccurate' and 'frankly ridiculous' language in an executive order that revoked federal recognition of trans, nonbinary and intersex people — an order that has formed the basis for a flood of other actions from the administration targeting trans Americans.
Judge Reyes suggested that, taken together, Trump's executive orders against trans people 'scream animus,' or are motivated by prejudice.
Her injunction — which followed a lawsuit from more than 20 trans service members — is intended to 'maintain the status quo of military policy regarding transgender service that existed immediately before' Trump issued his executive order, Reyes wrote.
Judge Reyes argues that a categorical ban on trans service members in the nation's military discriminates based on transgender status and sex — and because 'it is soaked in animus.'
During an appeals court hearing last month, judges did not appear convinced by the government's arguments that the Pentagon's policy doesn't ban trans service members per se but gender dysphoria diagnosis and healthcare.
Earlier this month, trans service members suing to overturn ban on trans argued that they 'have served in our military for years with honor and distinction,' they told the Supreme Court.
'Applicants have admitted they have no evidence that such service has negatively impacted military readiness or unit cohesion, nor can they identify any harm that would occur during the short time the preliminary injunction is in effect while their appeal is resolved,' they added. 'The Ban has been enjoined for weeks, and the government has delayed in requesting the alleged 'emergency' relief it now seeks, which independently justifies denial of the request.'
In a separate filing, a group of trans service members in a parallel case wrote to the court to warn that blocking those lower court orders would 'immediately trigger' a harsh process of removal for 'thousands of transgender service members, causing reputational, professional, and constitutional harm that can never be undone.'
'Once initiated, the shame and opprobrium of being forced into that process (even if later reversed) causes irreparable harm,' they wrote.
This is a developing story
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
11 minutes ago
- Telegraph
RFK Jr appoints new vaccine committee – including vaccine sceptic doctor
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has appointed a new vaccine advisory panel, including a medical doctor who has claimed that Covid vaccines 'may damage [children's] brains, their heart, their immune system, and their ability to have children in the future.' The move comes just two days after the US health secretary unprecedentedly dismissed all 17 members of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), the body responsible for advising on vaccine recommendations to prevent and control diseases. Of the eight new members, four have actively spoken out against vaccination in some form. The most controversial pick is Dr Robert Malone, a prominent opponent of mRNA vaccines who also falsely claims to have invented the technology. While Dr Malone was involved in some of the early research on mRNA, his role was minimal at best, say experts. Dr Malone has previously stated that mass vaccination programs during the pandemic were enabled by 'mass formation psychosis,' an unrecognised medical term he coined, which he says also explains how Nazi Germany carried out the Holocaust. He was temporarily banned from X (formerly Twitter) for spreading misinformation about Covid-19, including claims that mRNA vaccines are experimental gene therapy that could cause irreparable harm, particularly to children. Also on the panel is Dr Martin Kulldorff, a former Harvard Medical School professor who was dismissed from his position in 2024. Dr Kulldorff was a key figure in the Great Barrington Declaration, an open letter published in 2020 that opposed widespread lockdowns and was widely criticised by experts as dangerous and anti-scientific. Of the panel, which includes Joseph Hibbeln, Retsef Levi, Cody Meissner, James Pagano, Vicky Pebsworth and Michael Rossm, four who have previously worked on committees associated with either the Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), or the Food and Drug Administration. 'All of these individuals are committed to evidence-based medicine, gold-standard science, and common sense,' Mr Kennedy said in a post on X. It's not clear what process these figures went through, but it typically takes more than a year to be appointed to a federal advisory panel. Dr Noel Brewer, a professor in public health at the University of North Carolina who was a member of the ACIP, said it typically takes more than a year to be appointed as a member of a federal advisory panel – and that he went through a 1.5 year process to serve on ACIP. 'You apply by writing an essay,' he told the Telegraph. 'Once you're approved, you fill out maybe 20 or 30 forms. You disclose all of your financial stakes in companies and all sources of income. Then you get ethics training.' The health secretary added that the panel would attend a CDC meeting on June 25, where advisors are expected to deliberate and vote on who should receive a number of vaccines, including the flu shot, Covid-19 boosters, and vaccines for RSV, HPV, and meningococcal disease. Dr Peter Hotez, a vaccine expert and Dean for the National School of Tropical Medicine at the Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, said: 'Kennedy is leading a MAHA [Make America Healthy Again] pseudoscience agenda, mostly as an economic stimulus for a very corrupt wellness/influencer industry'.
Reuters
29 minutes ago
- Reuters
UN nuclear watchdog says Iran in breach of obligations, Iran announces counter-measures
VIENNA/DUBAI, June 12 (Reuters) - The U.N. nuclear watchdog's board of governors declared Iran in breach of its non-proliferation obligations on Thursday and Tehran announced counter-measures, as tensions rose in the Middle East before further U.S.-Iranian nuclear talks. U.S. and Iranian officials will hold a sixth round of talks on Tehran's accelerating uranium enrichment programme in Oman on Sunday, the Omani foreign minister said on Thursday. But security fears have risen since U.S. President Donald Trump said on Wednesday American personnel were being moved out of the region because "it could be a dangerous place" and that Tehran would not be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon. The International Atomic Energy Agency's policy-making Board of Governors declared Iran in breach of its non-proliferation obligations for the first time in almost 20 years, raising the prospect of reporting it to the U.N. Security Council. The step is the culmination of several stand-offs between the Vienna-based IAEA and Iran since Trump pulled the U.S. out of a nuclear deal between Tehran and major powers in 2018 during his first term, after which that accord unravelled. An IAEA official said Iran had responded by informing the nuclear watchdog that it plans to open a new uranium enrichment facility. The move by Iran was among several measures being taken because of the resolution, Iranian state TV said. The IAEA official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said Iran had given no further details such as the location of the site. Behrouz Kamalvandi, spokesperson for Iran's atomic energy organisation, told state TV that Tehran had informed the IAEA of two countermeasures including "the upgrading of centrifuges in Fordow (enrichment plant) from first to sixth generation, which will significantly boost the production of enriched uranium". Enrichment can be used to produce uranium for reactor fuel or, at higher levels of refinement, for atomic bombs. Iran says its nuclear energy programme is only for peaceful purposes. Reiterating Iran's stance that it will not abandon the right to nuclear enrichment as a signatory to the global Non-Proliferation Treaty, a senior Iranian official told Reuters that rising tensions in the region were intended to "influence Tehran to change its position about its nuclear rights." The Iranian official said a "friendly" country had alerted Tehran to a potential strike on its nuclear sites by arch-adversary Israel and reiterated that the Islamic Republic would not abandon its commitment to nuclear enrichment. "We don't want tensions and prefer diplomacy to resolve the (nuclear) issue, but our armed forces are fully ready to respond to any military strike," the Iranian official said. Iranian state media reported that Iran's military had begun drills earlier than planned to focus on "enemy movements". The decision by Trump to remove some personnel from the region comes at a volatile and highly sensitive moment in the oil-producing Middle East, where security has already been destabilised by the Gaza war between Israel and Palestinian militant group Hamas that began in October 2023. Oil prices initially rose after Trump's announcement but later eased. Foreign energy companies were continuing their operations as usual, a senior Iraqi official overseeing operations in southern oilfields told Reuters on Thursday. Trump has threatened to strike Iran if the nuclear talks do not progress, and in an interview released on Wednesday said he had become less confident that Tehran would agree to stop enriching uranium. The Islamic Republic wants a lifting of the U.S. sanctions imposed on the country since 2018.
Daily Mail
34 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Trump's secretary clarifies Elon Musk 'body-check' incident
Trump's Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent (pictured) faced an unusual line of questioning on Wednesday when he testified on Capitol Hill. During a hearing on his department's budget before the Ways and Means Committee, Bessent was grilled about whether he really tackled Elon Musk in the White House last month. 'Mr. Secretary, how are you doing?' Representative Jimmy Gomez (D-Calif.) (pictured) said innocuously. 'So far, so good,' Bessent quipped back. 'Okay. I was just curious because I know Elon Musk body checked you at the White House. No animosity to Elon Musk, right?' Gomez continued. 'You know that?' Bessent asked about the sparring event. 'That's what I heard,' Gomez responded. Bessent had been partaking in three days of trade negotiations in London and had not yet been questioned about the story. 'So you believe, you believe what you read on Breitbart is what you are telling us, Congressman,' Bessent pressed. 'I didn't know ... If it's too sensitive for you I won't ask that question, but let me move' Gomez flubbed. 'I will take South Carolina over South Africa any day', Bessent replied, referring to his home state versus Musk's nation of birth. Musk was spotted with a black eye as he delivered a sort of farewell address in the Oval Office upon departing from his role as a 'special government employee' heading up Trump's Department of Government Efficiency DOGE). At the time, Musk claimed that the black eye was the result of roughhousing with his young son, X í¿ A-12, who is more commonly know as X. But speculation grew as more was revealed about his tense standoff with Bessent. Former Chief Strategist Steve Bannon told in May that Musk's turbulent time in the White House was marred when he was confronted over wild promises to save the administration 'a trillion dollars'. That's when an irate Musk physically 'shoved' 62-year-old Bessent. 'Scott Bessent called him out and said, "You promised us a trillion dollars (in cuts), and now you're at like $100 billion, and nobody can find anything, what are you doing?"' Bannon revealed. And that's when Elon got physical. It's a sore subject with him. 'It wasn't an argument, it was a physical confrontation. Elon basically shoved him.'
