Pentagon Halts Gender Transition Treatments, Moves to Remove Transgender Troops

A new directive from the Pentagon signals a significant shift in policy regarding transgender service members, effectively halting gender transition treatments and initiating the process of removing them from the military. The move comes in the wake of a Supreme Court order that allowed a previously blocked ban on transgender military service to proceed.

Stephen Ferrara, the acting assistant secretary of defense for health affairs, issued a memo dated May 9 directing immediate implementation of the new guidance. The policy change drastically alters the healthcare landscape for transgender troops. The Pentagon will now only cover mental health services and counseling related to gender dysphoria. All other treatments pertaining to gender dysphoria will be referred to the private sector, placing the financial burden of these treatments on the affected individuals.

Furthermore, all scheduled and planned transgender surgeries are to be canceled. However, a provision exists for service members who began cross-sex hormone therapy prior to the memo’s issuance. They may continue receiving hormone therapy until their separation from the military to prevent potential health complications arising from abrupt cessation.

Last week, transgender troops were reportedly given a limited timeframe – between 30 and 60 days – to either voluntarily leave the military or face involuntary removal. Active-duty service members have until June 6, one month after the court’s ruling, to make their decision. Reservists have a slightly longer period, with a deadline of July 7.

The Supreme Court’s decision to allow the ban to move forward effectively paused a lower court injunction that had previously blocked its implementation. This paved the way for the Defense Department to put the new policy into effect. Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell stated that the ruling enables the department to resume policies focused on "Prioritizing Military Excellence and Readiness."

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth further elaborated on the policy in the memo, stating that those diagnosed with or exhibiting symptoms consistent with gender dysphoria have the option to leave the military voluntarily. However, if they choose not to do so, they may be subject to mandatory separation.

The Supreme Court’s action did not involve a ruling on the underlying legal arguments surrounding the ban. Instead, it permitted President Donald Trump’s January 27 executive order, which barred transgender individuals from military service, to take effect. The Trump administration had argued that delaying the policy’s implementation could negatively impact operational readiness.

Officials defending the policy have consistently emphasized its necessity for maintaining unit cohesion, readiness, discipline, and cost efficiency within the military. Trump’s executive order also mandated that the Pentagon revise its medical standards to prioritize combat preparedness and eliminate the use of gender identity-based pronouns within the department.

The blanket ban on transgender individuals serving in the military had previously been lifted under President Barack Obama in 2014, marking a significant step towards inclusivity. However, the current policy represents a reversal of that progress.

This latest policy shift coincides with a broader effort by Pentagon leadership, under Hegseth, to dismantle many diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives. Last month, Hegseth stated that a substantial majority of DEI-related policies, approximately 99.9%, had been removed. Additionally, changes have been announced regarding fitness standards, with the aim of ensuring that male and female troops are held to the same requirements for combat readiness. These changes have been met with mixed reactions, with some praising the emphasis on combat effectiveness and others criticizing the potential impact on diversity and inclusion within the military.

The implications of this policy shift are far-reaching for transgender individuals currently serving in the military. It not only disrupts their access to necessary medical care but also creates uncertainty about their future within the armed forces. The decision has sparked considerable debate about the balance between military readiness, inclusivity, and the rights of transgender individuals to serve their country. The coming weeks and months will likely see further legal challenges and public discourse surrounding this controversial policy.