Judicial Overreach in the Barracks |
Judicial Overreach in the Barracks
The D.C. Circuit’s transgender ruling unconstitutionally usurps the Commander-in-Chief.
Don Brown | June 4, 2026
A divided panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled Monday that the Pentagon’s policy barring individuals with gender dysphoria from military service likely violates the Constitution. In Talbott v. United States, the majority found the policy -- issued under President Trump’s executive order and implemented by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth -- appears driven by “the bare desire to harm a politically unpopular group.” The court upheld a preliminary injunction protecting current transgender servicemembers from removal while allowing the ban on new accessions.
This is not constitutional adjudication. It is judicial legislation dressed in equal-protection robes, and it represents another dangerous step by federal courts outside the bounds of their authority and into the core constitutional domain of the political branches.
The Constitution is unambiguous. Article II, Section 2 declares that the President “shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States.” Article I, Section 8 grants Congress the power “to raise and support Armies” and “to provide and maintain a Navy,” along with the authority “to make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces.” Nowhere does the Constitution grant federal judges any role in setting military standards, determining fitness for service, or second-guessing the professional judgment of military leaders on unit cohesion, readiness, lethality, or medical qualifications.
Military service is not a constitutional........