FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
March 27, 2025
Contacts:
Amanda Johnston, ajohnston@glad.org, 617-417-7769
Malkia Hutchinson, mhutchinson@nclrights.org, 202-734-3548
Second Federal Court Blocks Trump’s Transgender Military Ban
Lead attorneys in earlier case Talbott v. Trump respond to the now second nationwide preliminary injunction—this time in the case of Shilling v. Trump
WASHINGTON, DC—In Shilling v. Trump today, U.S. District Court Judge Benjamin Hale Settle issued what will now be a second nationwide preliminary injunction blocking implementation of the transgender military ban resulting from Trump’s January executive order. Earlier this month, U.S. District Court Judge Ana Reyes in Talbott v. Trump issued a first nationwide preliminary injunction blocking the ban. In a forceful order in which Judge Reyes held that the ban undermines national security and is likely unconstitutional she called it “soaked with animus and dripping with pretext.” Earlier tonight in Talbott, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia ruled that the Department of Defense can take no action negatively impacting any servicemember while the court is considering the department’s motion for emergency stay.
Department of Defense implementation of the ban to identify and separate transgender servicemembers was scheduled to begin on March 28, a rapid timeframe former military leaders have characterized as “rushed” and “alarming,” noting that the complexity of the military personnel system requires “months of careful planning and timelines.”
Today’s order in Shilling, along with the injunction previously issued in Talbott by Judge Reyes, prevents the Department of Defense from initiating separation proceedings against any transgender service members or otherwise enforcing the ban.
The lead attorneys in Talbott v. Trump, GLAD Law Senior Director of Transgender and Queer Rights Jennifer Levi and NCLR Legal Director Shannon Minter, respond to today’s issuance of a second preliminary injunction blocking implementation of the ban:
“Given the thousands of brave and decorated transgender servicemembers facing unthinkable harms as the result of this ban, we are heartened but not surprised by today’s decision,” said GLAD Law Senior Director of Transgender and Queer Rights Jennifer Levi. “President Trump’s executive order and Secretary Hegseth’s implementation represent a policy that cannot be constitutionally justified. Thousands of transgender servicemembers currently serving have clearly demonstrated they meet all military standards, with many deployed to critical missions worldwide, proving their capabilities beyond question. These dedicated servicemembers and their families have earned our nation’s gratitude and respect, and the government has a responsibility to honor the commitments it has made to them. This is about keeping faith with Americans who have risked everything to defend our freedoms.
“In both Talbott and Shilling, it was abundantly clear to the court that it must act swiftly to protect our troops from an unconstitutional and indefensible ban that would disrupt the lives and dismantle the careers of thousands of transgender servicemembers and their families. The harms associated with this ban are gut-wrenching,” said NCLR Legal Director Shannon Minter. “In each of these cases, the government did not even attempt to claim that any evidence supported its position. There is no reason to discharge individuals who are serving capably and honorably.”
A nationwide preliminary injunction halts implementation of the ban and protects transgender servicemembers and recruits from its significant harms while the future of the ban is being decided in court. These harms include servicemembers being removed from deployments, denied commissions and promotions, placed on administrative leave, denied medically needed care, and ultimately being placed in involuntary separation proceedings, a process used to address instances of misconduct.
Talbott v. Trump, the first legal challenge filed against President Trump’s recent transgender military ban executive order, is on behalf of 32 plaintiffs and was brought by LGBTQ+ legal groups GLAD Law and NCLR with pro bono legal counsel from Wardenski P.C. and Kropf Moseley PLCC. GLAD Law’s Jennifer Levi and NCLR’s Shannon Minter, the lead attorneys in this case, are transgender themselves and each have more than three decades of experience litigating landmark and key LGBTQ+ cases. Together, Levi and Minter led the legal fight in 2017 against the transgender military ban in Doe v. Trump and Stockman v. Trump, which also secured a nationwide preliminary injunction blocking that ban.
###
GLAD Law (GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders) has been a leading force in LGBTQ+ rights for nearly 50 years. With deep roots in New England and impact nationwide, we use strategic litigation, legislation, and public education to fight discrimination based on gender identity, sexual orientation, and HIV status. GLAD Law’s bold strategy and precedent-setting victories have reshaped the legal landscape, advancing equality for all people facing discrimination and social barriers. www.glad.org
The National Center for Lesbian Rights (NCLR) is a national legal organization committed to advancing the human and civil rights of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer community through litigation, public policy advocacy, and public education. Since its founding, NCLR has maintained a longstanding commitment to racial and economic justice and the LGBTQ community’s most vulnerable. www.nclrights.org
