Appeals Court Rules On Hegseth Policy
In a significant and sharply polarizing legal turn, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit has cleared the way for the Pentagon to resume enforcement of the Trump administration’s 2025 policy restricting military service by individuals with gender dysphoria. The 2–1 decision stays a lower court’s preliminary injunction and marks the latest escalation in what has become one of the most contentious military policy battles of the modern era.
The ruling allows the Department of War, under Secretary Pete Hegseth, to continue implementing the revised guidelines while the case winds its way through the courts. The policy — reinstated earlier this year via Executive Order 14183 — bars most individuals with gender dysphoria from enlisting or continuing service, citing “combat readiness, unit cohesion, and cost control” as key justifications.
Writing for the majority, Judges Gregory Katsas and Neomi Rao emphasized the long-standing authority of the executive branch to determine military standards. They faulted the district court for failing to give proper deference to the military’s judgment.
“The United States military enforces strict medical standards… the district court nonetheless preliminarily enjoined the 2025 policy based on its own contrary assessment of the evidence,” they wrote, concluding that the court had overstepped its role.
White House spokeswoman Anna Kelly hailed the decision, calling it “a great win for the security of the American people,” and reinforcing the administration’s message that military service must prioritize mission-readiness over what it calls “woke gender ideology.”
Yet the ruling also drew fierce criticism, most notably from Judge Patricia Millett Pillard in her dissent. She accused the administration of basing the policy not on careful evaluation, but on ideology.
“There is no evidence that [President Trump or Secretary Hegseth] consulted with uniformed military leaders,” she noted, arguing that the policy lacks a defensible military rationale and appears to stem from bias. Her dissent pointed directly to the language of the executive order, which describes transgender identity as “inconsistent” with military values of honor and humility.
The broader backdrop to the ruling is a decade-long pendulum swing on transgender military service. First opened under the Obama administration in 2016, service by transgender individuals was curtailed in 2018 under Trump, reinstated under Biden in 2021, and once again restricted under the renewed Trump presidency in 2025.
For now, the Trump administration’s policy remains in force. But the deeper question — how America defines service, identity, and readiness — is far from settled.