Share and Follow
Left: President Donald Trump speaks before signing an executive order barring transgender female athletes from competing in women’s or girls’ sporting events, in the East Room of the White House, Wednesday, Feb. 5, 2025, in Washington (AP Photo/Alex Brandon). Right: Emily Shilling (YouTube/Reuters).
A federal appeals court has rejected the Trump administration’s request to pause a lower court decision blocking Donald Trump’s ban on transgender people serving in the military Monday, handing the federal government yet another loss related to its anti-transgender policies.
The case before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit was an appeal of U.S. District Judge Benjamin Settle’s ruling to deny a stay of his ruling against the transgender military ban.
Settle, a George W. Bush appointee sitting in Washington state, issued a nationwide preliminary injunction blocking implementation of Trump’s January executive order banning transgender people from serving in the military on March 28. The administration asked that Settle stay his order while the full appeal proceeds, and Settle denied the request.
The Trump administration next asked the San Francisco-based 9th Circuit to put Settle’s ruling on hold, thereby allowing it to enforce the ban at least temporarily; however, a three-judge panel for the appeals court denied the request Monday without comment. The panel included U.S. Circuit Judges A. Wallace Tashima, a Bill Clinton appointee, John B. Owens, a Barack Obama appointee, and Roopali Desai, a Joe Biden appointee.
“The request for an administrative stay is denied,” the tersely-worded ruling said. No reasoning was provided and no judges appeared to dissent.
The case is Shilling v. Trump and was filed by Commander Emily Shilling, a decorated Navy pilot with over 60 combat missions and high-risk work as a test pilot, on behalf of herself and six actively serving transgender service members. In Talbott v. Trump, a companion case proceeding in the District of Columbia Circuit, the Trump administration has also fielded multiple losses over its transgender military ban.
Earlier this month, U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes called the ban “unabashedly demeaning,” and barred its enforcement. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth responded by mocking the judge and issuing a declaration on social media, “We are appealing this decision, and we will win.”
Reyes ruled against the ban a second time after the administration issued “new” military guidance. However, on appeal, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia lifted the stay, but warned that its ruling “should not be construed in any way as a ruling on the merits,” and specifically prohibited the Department of Defense from taking any action that negatively impacts any service member while the case proceeds. Should the DOD do anything that violates the order, the circuit court said it would “expeditiously” consider a motion to lift the stay.
“For far too long, we have allowed standards to slip,” Hegseth posted Monday. “We’ve had different standards for men/women serving in combat arms MOS’s and jobs….”
“That’s not acceptable, and it changes right now!” he continued.
For far too long, we have allowed standards to slip. We’ve had different standards for men/women serving in combat arms MOS’s and jobs….
That’s not acceptable, and it changes right now! pic.twitter.com/Zn9OyBew6G
— Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth (@SecDef) March 31, 2025
Notably, plaintiffs in the Shilling case are represented by attorneys from the law firm of Perkins Coie, which has sued the administration after Trump issued an executive order aimed at kneecapping the firm’s work with the government. It is one of several orders the president has issued against law firms linked to those he perceives as political enemies.
Love true crime? Sign up for our newsletter, The Law&Crime Docket, to get the latest real-life crime stories delivered right to your inbox.
