特朗普政府称这是一个“极其重要”的问题，并已向最高法院提出紧急上诉，寻求立即解除29名跨性别的现役军人的职务，甚至在他们挑战五角大楼禁令的案件于1月份开庭审理之前。
几个法院已经发现，这项禁令可能是出于敌意，侵犯了军人享有正当程序和平等保护的宪法权利——政府强烈反对这一结论。
尽管法官们去年给特朗普开了绿灯为了更广泛地推进对有性别焦虑史的服役人员的禁令，联邦法官在一个单独的案件中，美国诉塔尔博特案去年6月，美国军方阻止了20多名提起诉讼挑战该政策的个人原告。
副检察长约翰·绍尔（John Sauer）称，允许这些原告继续留在他们的位置上的裁决是“严重错误的”
“美国军方决定谁可以在国家武装部队中服役的权力是一个非常重要的问题，”绍尔在《华盛顿邮报》上写道很抱歉，这段文本暂时无法提供译文。“宪法是否禁止军方通过采取类似这里的政策来行使这一权力是一个反复出现的问题，这个问题以前出现过，如果没有本法院的审查，很可能会再次出现。因此，法院应借此机会解决［国防部部长］赫格斯政策的合宪性问题，并推翻以下裁决，该裁决的推理与法院的先例或对军方的尊重不符。”
法官们将在今年秋天考虑，在下级法院对案情做出最终裁决之前，是否在早期阶段审理此案。
与此同时，29名原告——他们是现役军人、预备役军人、国民警卫队成员和一名寻求入伍的人——将继续留在部队。
“正如特朗普政府自己的律师承认的那样，这些人都是符合所有军事标准的合格人员，”性少数群体法律倡导组织GLAD Law代表跨性别服役人员的律师詹妮弗·李维（Jennifer Levi）说。“没有理由浪费数百万纳税人的钱，仅仅基于敌意和本届政府的政治冲动，就赶走数千名训练有素、技术娴熟、装备精良的士兵。”
Trump asks Supreme Court to allow immediate firing of 29 transgender military service members
Calling it a matter of ＂exceptional importance，＂ the Trump administration has filed an urgent appeal with the Supreme Court seeking the immediate removal of 29 active-duty service members who are transgender even before their case challenging the Pentagon ban goes to trial in January．
Several courts have found that the ban was likely rooted in animus and violates servicemembers constitutional rights to due process and equal protection – a conclusion the government strongly disputes．
While the justices last yeargave Trump the green lightto move forward broadly with a ban on service members who have a history of gender dysphoria， federal judges in a separate case，U．S． v． Talbott， last June blocked the military from discharging more than two dozen individual plaintiffs who brought the lawsuit challenging the policy．
＂The authority of the U．S． military to determine who may serve in the Nation’s armed forces is a matter of exceptional importance，＂ Sauer wrote in thegovernment＇s petition． ＂Whether the Constitution prohibits the military from exercising that authority by adopting a policy like the one here is a recurring issue， which has arisen before and will likely arise again absent this Court’s review． The Court should thus take this opportunity to address the constitutionality of the ［Department of Defense Secretary］ Hegseth policy and reverse the decision below， whose reasoning cannot be squared with this Court’s precedents or deference to the military．＂
The justices will consider this fall whether to hear the case at this early stage， before any final ruling on the merits by a lower court．
In the meantime， the 29 plaintiffs – who are active-duty， reservists， National Guard members and a person seeking to enlist – will remain in the force．
＂As the Trump administration’s own attorneys admitted， these are qualified individuals who are meeting all military standards，＂ said Jennifer Levi， an attorney representing the transgender service members with the LGBTQ legal advocacy group GLAD Law． ＂There is no reason to waste millions of taxpayer dollars to kick out thousands of highly trained， skilled and decorated troops based on nothing but hostility and this administration’s political whims．＂
