A federal judge has temporarily halted President Trump’s directive to exclude transgender individuals from military service, citing equal treatment under the law. This decision follows a lawsuit by active-duty transgender service members and grants the government until March 21 to appeal. Additionally, a ruling blocked efforts to dissolve USAID, emphasizing that such actions violate constitutional authority. Concerns about discrimination and administrative overreach are raised, reflecting broader implications for both military and foreign aid policies.
The US military has faced a significant shift in policy regarding transgender individuals, as President Trump previously mandated that those wishing to live openly as transgender should exit military service. However, a recent ruling by a federal judge has put this directive on hold, raising important legal questions surrounding the cuts to USAID as well.
A federal judge has issued a temporary injunction against President Trump’s order to exclude transgender individuals from military service, citing a violation of the constitutional principle that all individuals deserve equal treatment under the law. Judge Ana C. Reyes emphasized that this executive order undermines the fundamental rights of service members.
The judge’s ruling comes in response to a lawsuit brought by six active-duty transgender service members and two individuals seeking to enlist. The suspension of Trump’s order will remain in effect until March 21, providing the government with the opportunity to appeal the decision in a higher court.
This ruling has sparked concerns that discrimination may become normalized within American society once again.
The Court Acknowledges the Valor of Soldiers
Judge Reyes pointed out the potential for intense public discourse surrounding this topic, noting that the president could have enacted a policy that balanced military readiness with the rights of all Americans to equal treatment. She stated that the current regulation does not achieve that balance.
In a compelling statement, she affirmed, “Every individual who has chosen to serve deserves our respect and gratitude.” The court’s remarks reflect a commitment to honor all active military personnel and veterans, regardless of their gender identity.
Under Trump’s directive, the aim is to exclude a significant number of transgender individuals from military service.
Trump’s Perception of Transgender Individuals
President Trump directed Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, in a decree signed on January 27, to revise the treatment of transgender individuals in the military. The order claims that the presence of transgender individuals undermines a soldier’s commitment to an honorable, disciplined lifestyle and negatively impacts military readiness.
Transgender individuals are those who do not identify with the gender assigned to them at birth. In 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) declassified transgender identities as mental illnesses, reflecting a contemporary understanding of gender identity. Prior to this, a Pentagon policy had established protections against discrimination based on gender identity.
Under Trump’s vision, transgender athletes have been barred from participating in the 2028 Olympic Games.
The Unclear Count of Transgender Military Personnel
In the wake of Trump’s directive, the Department of Defense was tasked with identifying individuals diagnosed with ‘gender dysphoria’ within a month. Those identified were to be discharged unless their service records warranted otherwise.
Since 2016, a policy implemented during former President Obama’s administration has allowed individuals who openly identify as transgender to serve in the military. However, the precise number of transgender personnel remains unknown, as comprehensive studies are lacking and many individuals refrain from disclosing their identities due to fears of discrimination. Estimates suggest they constitute a small percentage of active service members.
In a separate legal matter concerning frozen foreign aid from the US government, a federal judge has also imposed a deadline for resolution.
USAID Restructuring Blocked
President Trump faced a setback regarding the dissolution of the USAID agency, a move pushed by tech billionaire Elon Musk and the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). A federal judge ruled that the proposed closure is unconstitutional. “The expedited dismantling of USAID likely violates the US Constitution in various aspects,” remarked the judge.
The ruling mandates that all USAID employees regain access to their email and computer systems, while DOGE is prohibited from taking further steps to dissolve the agency.
Historian Berg has expressed concerns about potential administrative overreach in the US. The question arises: who stands to gain from these developments?
Scrutiny of DOGE and Musk’s Role
The lawsuit was initiated by USAID employees and contractors. The judge noted that there is no legal authority granting the executive branch the power to eliminate USAID. “These actions not only harmed the plaintiffs but also the public interest, as they stripped Congress of its constitutional authority to determine the fate of an agency established by law.”
Although Musk serves as an advisor, his conduct suggests he operates as the head of DOGE. Nonetheless, to wield such authority over the agency, Musk would need confirmation from the US Senate.
This report was originally broadcast by Deutschlandfunk on March 19, 2025, at 08:00 AM.