On Tuesday, the Supreme Court granted President Donald Trump permission to implement his ban on transgender individuals serving in the military.

This decision followed an emergency request from the Trump administration to lift a nationwide injunction that had blocked the policy while legal challenges were ongoing.

The court’s order indicated dissent from the three liberal justices.

This ruling represents a setback for seven transgender service members, with Navy commander Emily Shilling as the lead plaintiff, who had sought to prevent the enforcement of the ban.

Organizations representing the plaintiffs, including Lambda Legal and the Human Rights Campaign Foundation, expressed their concern, stating that the ruling significantly harms transgender service members who have proven their dedication and capability in defending the nation.

They criticized the policy as being rooted in prejudice rather than military readiness.

In a related legal context, a judge in Washington, D.C. had previously blocked the ban nationwide, but the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued a temporary hold on that ruling while reviewing arguments regarding its permanent status.

The court has not yet made a final determination.

The policy, announced in February, imposes stricter restrictions compared to a previous policy implemented during Trump’s initial term.

It effectively disqualifies individuals with gender dysphoria or those who have undergone medical treatments related to gender dysphoria from military service, as noted by Solicitor General D. John Sauer in court documents.

In justifying the Supreme Court’s intervention, Sauer argued that judges must show “substantial deference” to the Defense Department’s assessment of military issues.

The government’s position relied on a Pentagon report from the previous Trump administration, which asserted that individuals with gender dysphoria pose a risk to “military effectiveness and lethality.”

The challengers contended that the ban violates the 14th Amendment of the Constitution, which mandates equal application of laws, as well as other constitutional provisions.

Legal representatives for transgender service members highlighted that these individuals have demonstrated their ability to serve effectively alongside their peers.

After Joe Biden’s presidency began, he reversed many of Trump’s earlier restrictions.

The lawyers for the plaintiffs noted that the ban reflects a profound level of animosity towards transgender individuals, arguing that it is founded on the erroneous belief that transgender people do not exist.