New York Attorney General Letitia James, along with a coalition of 20 other attorneys general, has filed a brief in support of transgender service members challenging the President's Executive Order banning transgender Americans from serving in the U.S. military. The brief was submitted to the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington and seeks a preliminary injunction to prevent the implementation of the ban.
Attorney General James emphasized that all service members deserve recognition for their commitment and criticized the policy as exclusionary. "All service members deserve our utmost gratitude for their bravery and sacrifice. We should be honoring their commitment, not degrading it with exclusionary policies," she stated.
The Executive Order, issued by President Trump on January 27, 2025, titled “Prioritizing Military Excellence and Readiness,” instructs the Secretary of Defense to impose restrictions on transgender individuals in the Armed Forces. The coalition argues that this order violates the Fifth Amendment by denying equal protection and due process to service members.
Attorney General James has previously opposed this policy, having filed another brief on February 14, 2025, in support of plaintiffs seeking an injunction against it in Talbot v. Trump.
The coalition contends that reinstating such a ban is detrimental to national security and undermines military readiness by excluding qualified individuals based solely on gender identity. They also argue that state laws protecting transgender rights are violated by this order.
Research indicates that approximately 150,000 veterans and active duty servicemembers identify as transgender. Past reviews have concluded that allowing these individuals to serve according to their gender identity benefits national interests.
The attorneys general warn that banning transgender people from military service could impair state security efforts since National Guard recruitment would suffer. They point out that when previous bans were lifted or reversed, there was no negative impact on National Guard operations.
The amicus brief is supported by attorneys general from Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin.