Washington, D.C. – May 08, 2025
The United States military will begin the process of separating approximately 1,000 transgender service members following a Supreme Court ruling that allows President Donald Trump’s ban on transgender military service to take effect while ongoing legal challenges continue.
In a memo released on Thursday, Pentagon Chief Pete Hegseth directed the military departments to begin immediate separation procedures for personnel who had previously self-identified for voluntary separation before 26 March 2025.
Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell confirmed that around 1,000 service members diagnosed with gender dysphoria fall into this category. A senior defence official noted that, as of late last year, there were 4,240 active-duty and reserve troops with such diagnoses.
According to the memo, active-duty troops who do not voluntarily separate by 6 June, and reserve troops by 7 June, will face involuntary discharge proceedings. “On conclusion of the self-identification eligibility window, the Military Departments will initiate involuntary separation processes,” the memo stated.
The action follows an executive order signed by President Trump on 27 January, in which he declared that “expressing a false ‘gender identity’ divergent from an individual’s sex cannot satisfy the rigorous standards necessary for military service.”
A follow-up memo issued by the Pentagon in February further outlined the enforcement of the policy, indicating that transgender individuals would be barred from joining the military and that currently serving members would need to seek individual waivers to remain in service.
This move marks the latest shift in a years-long policy tug-of-war. Transgender military service was first openly permitted under the Obama administration, only to face reversal under the Trump administration. Legal and political battles over the rights of transgender troops have since continued, with the latest Supreme Court decision representing a significant setback for transgender service members and advocates.
Critics of the policy argue it discriminates against qualified individuals willing to serve their country, while supporters claim it preserves military readiness and cohesion.
Further legal action is expected as advocacy groups vow to continue challenging the policy in federal court.