A federal judge raised concerns on Tuesday regarding President Donald Trump's executive order to ban transgender troops from serving in the U.S. military. The judge described a portion of the directive as 'frankly ridiculous' during a hearing.
The judge, Ana Reyes, indicated that a ruling on whether to temporarily block the Trump administration from enforcing the order won't be made before early March. Plaintiffs' attorneys argue that the order discriminates against transgender troops.
Reyes expressed skepticism about the administration's reasoning for the policy change and praised the service of active-duty troops who sued to block the order. She questioned a government attorney about the relevance of gender identity in a combat situation.
Trump's order, issued on Jan. 27, claims that the sexual identity of transgender service members conflicts with military values and harms readiness. The order requires Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to develop a revised policy.
Six transgender active-duty service members and two others seeking to join the military filed a lawsuit to block the order. Plaintiffs' lawyers argue that the order shows hostility and animus toward transgender individuals.
Reyes criticized the order's language for smearing transgender troops and questioned the Justice Department attorney about the animus displayed. She also dismissed the notion that pronoun usage could impact military readiness.
The judge and the attorney disagreed on whether the order explicitly bans transgender individuals from serving. Reyes highlighted that Trump referred to it as a ban.
Plaintiffs' attorneys argue that the order violates transgender people's rights to equal protection under the Fifth Amendment. They claim it is an irrational and prejudicial attack on service members.
Government attorneys argue that the order does not immediately require the discharge of transgender troops and that equal protection only requires treating similarly situated persons alike.
The hearing is expected to continue with more arguments on March 3. The plaintiffs include decorated military personnel and are represented by legal organizations advocating for LGBTQ rights.
