Connect with us

Politics

Supreme Court allows Trump's ban on transgender troops

Published

on

Supreme Court allows Trump's ban on transgender troops

The Supreme Court has cleared the way for the Trump administration to remove thousands of active-duty members of the military because they are transgender.

The justices on Tuesday granted an appeal from President Trump’s lawyers and set aside orders for now from judges who had blocked the new policy set by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth.

The court issued a brief order and did not explain its reasons. The three liberals — Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson — dissented and said they voted to deny the appeal.

The decision is consistent with the court’s deference to the military. But trans rights advocates called it a “purge” of active-duty troops who have served honorably.

Following Trump’s lead, Hegseth issued a memo on Feb. 26 that said individuals who have a “diagnosis or history” of gender dysphoria are “incompatible” with military service.

Advertisement

It is not clear how many transgender people are serving in the U.S. armed forces. Past estimates said the number was greater than 15,000, but the Defense Department said its new policies would apply to 4,240 people on active duty.

While the administration contended the new policy was not a “ban,” it calls for the removal of those who underwent a gender transition.

Lambda Legal and the Human Rights Campaign Foundation called the ruling “a devastating blow to transgender servicemembers who have demonstrated their capabilities and commitment to our nation’s defense. By allowing this discriminatory ban to take effect while our challenge continues, the court has temporarily sanctioned a policy that has nothing to do with military readiness and everything to do with prejudice.”

The court’s order allows the Defense Department to begin enforcing its new policy even while the legal challenges against it proceed in the lower courts.

Upon taking office in January, Trump complained in an executive order that U.S. armed forces had been “recently afflicted with a radical gender ideology.” He said the Defense Department must “establish high standards of troop readiness, lethality, cohesion, honesty, humility, uniformity and integrity.” It would be “inconsistent” with those standards to have “individuals with gender dysphoria,” he said.

Advertisement

Seven transgender service members who filed suit in Seattle said Trump’s decree was based on “animus” and ignored the evidence they had served honorably and well.

The lead plaintiff, Cmdr. Emily Shilling, has been a Navy pilot for 19 years and flown more than 60 combat missions. She transitioned within the Navy in 2021 under a policy set by the Biden administration.

U.S. District Judge Benjamin Settle, an appointee of President George W. Bush, ruled that this new “blanket prohibition on transgender service” was discriminatory and outdated. It relied on concerns raised by military leaders before transgender troops were permitted to serve openly, he said.

Shilling has “1,750 flight hours in high performance Navy jets — including the F/A-18 Super Hornet — and has earned three air medals,” the judge said. “Yet absent an injunction, she will be promptly discharged solely because she is transgender.”

He said the government “provided no evidence” that “military readiness or unit cohesion” had been “adversely impacted by open transgender service.”

Advertisement

Settle not only ruled for the plaintiffs but imposed a nationwide bar against the new policy. His ruling followed a similar decision by U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes in Washington, D.C.

When the 9th Circuit refused to lift the nationwide order against Trump’s ban on transgender troops, the administration asked the Supreme Court to weigh in.

In his appeal, Solicitor Gen. D. John Sauer accused the judges of overstepping their authority and “usurping the Executive Branch’s authority to determine who may serve in the Nation’s armed forces.”

He said the military has long disqualified service members based on “hundreds of medical conditions” including asthma, diabetes and high blood pressure as well as eating disorders or autism.

Sauer told the court that a Defense Department study said troops with gender dysphoria are more likely to be “non-deployable” for significant periods of time and may need costly medical care.

Advertisement

He noted the court in 2018 had set aside challenges to a similar order from the first Trump administration restricting service by transgender persons, and he said the court should do the same again.

In response, the transgender troops said the court should stand back for now and “preserve the status quo” while the appeals are heard in the lower courts.

“Equal service by openly transgender service members has improved our military’s readiness, lethality, and unit cohesion, while discharging transgender service members from our Armed Forces would harm all three,” they told the court. “For nearly a decade, across multiple administrations, thousands of transgender people have openly served in our military with dedication, honor, and distinction.”

LGBTQ+ rights advocates described the new order as a purge.

The Trump administration “is asking for a shocking, unprecedented purge of thousands of current service members for a reason unrelated to their ability to serve,” said Shannon Minter, legal director of the National Center for Lesbian Rights. “This type of mass purge has never before happened in our nation’s history.”

Advertisement

Politics

Republicans light cigars, cigarettes on burning photos of Khamenei to show support for Iranian protesters

Published

on

Republicans light cigars, cigarettes on burning photos of Khamenei to show support for Iranian protesters

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Republican lawmakers are jumping on a social media trend to show their support for the anti-regime protesters in Iran.

Sen. Tim Sheehy, R-Mont., and Rep. Claudia Tenney, R-N.Y., posted photos of themselves using burning photos of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei to light up a cigarette and a cigar respectively. Both lawmakers used the caption “Smoke ’em if you got ’em.”

The lawmaker’s images mirror a social media trend in which people are using burning photos of Khamenei to light cigarettes and cigars. The trend emerged as the people of Iran hold increasingly intense protests against the Islamic regime. The movement against the regime has seen increasing support from abroad as world leaders back the people of Iran.

FREED IRANIAN PRISONER SAYS ‘IN TRUMP, THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC HAS MET ITS MATCH’

Advertisement

People gather during a protest on Jan. 8, 2026, in Tehran, Iran. (Anonymous/Getty Images)

Khamenei’s regime has started to crack down on protests and even instituted a sweeping internet blackout to try to quell the unrest. Some have posited that the internet blackout was also meant to impede the spreading of information about and visuals of abuses committed against protesters by regime-backed forces.

Recently, exiled Iranian crown prince Reza Pahlavi has publicly urged President Donald Trump and the U.S. to back protesters in Iran as they fight the decades-old regime.

Sheehy told Fox News Digital that he takes the issue personally, saying that Iran has participated in the torturing, kidnapping and killing of Americans across the globe, “including friends of mine.”

“The Iranian regime are a bunch of murderous b——- who have been chanting ‘death to America’ for the past 46 years. They have backed up this chant by kidnapping, torturing, and killing thousands of Americans all over the world, including friends of mine. For me, it’s personal; it’s time to take out the trash,” Sheehy said in a statement provided to Fox News Digital via email.

Advertisement

Sen. Tim Sheehy, R-Mont., showed his solidarity with the people of Iran by hopping on a social media trend in which she used a burning photo of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei to light a cigarette. (Courtesy of Sen. Tim Sheehy’s Office)

US HOSTAGES IN IRAN FACE HEIGHTENED RISK AS PROTESTS SPREAD, EXPERTS SAY NUMBER HELD MAY EXCEED ESTIMATES

The senator also expressed his solidarity with the people of Iran and encouraged them to keep fighting the regime.

“To the Iranian people — we applaud your courage, keep fighting, and know we fully support your brave efforts to topple this evil regime,” he added.

Tenney’s office also spoke with Fox News Digital about the congresswoman’s post, praising the bravery of the people of Iran for standing up to the regime. Additionally, Tenney’s office expressed the congresswoman’s solidarity with the Iranian people.

Advertisement

“The bravery of the Iranian people in the face of decades of oppression by a brutal, extremist regime is extraordinary. Men and women across Iran are risking their lives to stand up to authoritarian mullahs who have denied them basic freedoms for generations,” Tenney’s office said in a statement to Fox News Digital.

Rep. Claudia Tenney, R-N.Y., showed her solidarity with the people of Iran by hopping on a social media trend in which she used a burning photo of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei to light a cigar. (Courtesy of Rep. Claudia Tenney’s Office)

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

“The congresswoman stands firmly with the Iranian people and their demand for dignity and self-determination, and believes their courage must be recognized and amplified. Today, the Iranian people finally have an ally in the White House, President Trump, who has made clear that the United States stands with those fighting for freedom against tyranny,” Tenney’s office added.

Trump has been vocal about his support for the people of Iran and has warned that the U.S. would be ready to step in if the regime used violence against protesters.

Advertisement

“Iran is looking at FREEDOM, perhaps like never before,” the president wrote in a Truth Social post on Jan. 10. “The USA stands ready to help!!!”

Continue Reading

Politics

California launches investigation into child porn on Elon Musk’s AI site

Published

on

California launches investigation into child porn on Elon Musk’s AI site

California announced an investigation into Elon Musk’s artificial intelligence company xAI on Wednesday, with Gov. Gavin Newsom saying that the social media site owned by the billionaire is a “breeding ground for predators to spread nonconsenual sexually explicit AI deepfakes.”

Grok, the xAI chatbot, includes image-generation features that allow users to morph existing photos into new images. The newly created images are then posted publicly on X.

In some cases, users have created sexually explicit or nonconsensual images based on real people, including altered depictions that appear to show individuals partially or fully undressed. Others have generated images that appear to show minors, prompting criticism that there are not sufficient guardrails to prohibit the creation of child pornography.

The social media site has previously said “we take action against illegal content on X, including Child Sexual Abuse Material (CSAM), by removing it, permanently suspending accounts, and working with local governments and law enforcement as necessary. Anyone using or prompting Grok to make illegal content will suffer the same consequences as if they upload illegal content.”

Newsom called the sexualized images being created on the platform “vile.” Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta said his office will use “all tools at our disposal to keep Californians safe.”

Advertisement

“The avalanche of reports detailing the non-consensual, sexually explicit material that xAI has produced and posted online in recent weeks is shocking,” Bonta said in a statement Wednesday. “This material, which depicts women and children in nude and sexually explicit situations, has been used to harass people across the internet. I urge xAI to take immediate action to ensure this goes no further. We have zero tolerance for the AI-based creation and dissemination of nonconsensual intimate images or of child sexual abuse material.”

Newsom signed a pair of bills in 2024 that made it illegal to create, possess or distribute sexually charged images of minors even when they’re created with computers, not cameras. The measures took effect last year.

Assembly Bill 1831, authored by Assemblymember Marc Berman (D-Menlo Park), expanded the state’s child-porn prohibition to material that “contains a digitally altered or artificial-intelligence-generated depiction [of] what appears to be a person under 18 years of age” engaging in or simulating sexual conduct. Senate Bill 1381, authored by Sen. Aisha Wahab (D-Hayward), amended state law to more clearly prohibit using AI to create images of real children engaged in sexual conduct, or using children as models for digitally altered or AI-generated child pornography.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Video: Supreme Court May Allow States to Bar Transgender Athletes

Published

on

Video: Supreme Court May Allow States to Bar Transgender Athletes

new video loaded: Supreme Court May Allow States to Bar Transgender Athletes

transcript

transcript

Supreme Court May Allow States to Bar Transgender Athletes

The Supreme Court heard two cases from West Virginia and Idaho on Tuesday. Both concerned barring the participation of transgender athletes in girls’ and women’s sports teams.

“It is undisputed that states may separate their sports teams based on sex in light of the real biological differences between males and females. States may equally apply that valid sex-based rule to biological males who self-identify as female. Denying a special accommodation to trans-identifying individuals does not discriminate on the basis of sex or gender identity or deny equal protection.” “West Virginia argues that to protect these opportunities for cisgender girls, it has to deny them to B.P.J. But Title IX and the Equal Protection Clause protect everyone. And if the evidence shows there are no relevant physiological differences between B.P.J. and other girls, then there’s no basis to exclude her.” “Given that half the states are allowing it, allowing transgender girls and women to participate, about half are not, why would we at this point, just the role of this court, jump in and try to constitutionalize a rule for the whole country while there’s still, as you say, uncertainty and debate, while there’s still strong interest in other side?” “This court has held in cases like V.M.I. that in general, classification based on sex is impermissible because in general, men and women are simply situated. Where that’s not true is for the sorts of real, enduring, obvious differences that this court talked about in cases like V.M.I., the differences in reproductive biology. I don’t think the pseudoscience you’re suggesting has been baked.” “Well, it’s not pseudo. It’s good science.” “It’s not pseudoscience to say boys’ brain development happens at a different stage than girls does.” “Well, with all respect, I don’t think there’s any science anywhere that is suggested that these intellectual differences are traceable to biological differences.” “Can we avoid your whole similarly situated argument that you run because I don’t really like it that much either? And I’m not trying to prejudice anyone making that argument later. But I mean, I think it opens a huge can of worms that maybe we don’t need to get into here.”

Advertisement
The Supreme Court heard two cases from West Virginia and Idaho on Tuesday. Both concerned barring the participation of transgender athletes in girls’ and women’s sports teams.

By Meg Felling

January 13, 2026

Continue Reading

Trending