Civilian Judges Playing General: Activist Courts vs. Military Readiness
By Guest Contributor
June 11, 2026
Public Domain
By Jay Rogers
This week, a divided D.C. Circuit panel issued a 2-1 ruling finding that the Pentagon's policy disqualifying individuals with gender dysphoria from military service likely violates equal protection rights under the 14th Amendment. The majority held that Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth's implementing guidance was driven by animus toward transgender people rather than legitimate readiness requirements — blocking the discharge of currently serving plaintiffs while leaving the enlistment ban intact. The dissent said courts have no business second-guessing a military fitness determination. The dissent was right.
I've spent more than 30 years in financial services and family office governance, including roles demanding clear-eyed risk assessment and fiduciary discipline. My oldest son is a West Point graduate and is actively serving. My brother retired as a Green Beret. I raised sons with the same respect for military standards forged through real accountability. Watching courts treat the armed forces like a corporate HR department doesn't just frustrate me — it worries me. The military exists to win wars. When judges override that mission, the cost doesn't show up in a court filing — it shows up in a body bag.
President Trump signed Executive Order 14183 on January 27, 2025, titled "Prioritizing Military Excellence and Readiness." It directs the force to maintain high standards of lethality, cohesion, uniformity, and integrity — standards that conflict with the medical realities of gender dysphoria. Hegseth followed with implementing guidance in February 2025 that presumptively disqualifies individuals with a current diagnosis, history, or symptoms of gender dysphoria. New accessions are barred. Current service members face separation processing, though limited waivers remain possible. The rationale is practical: hormone treatments, surgical recovery, mental health comorbidities, and reduced deployability.
https://armedforces.press/opinion/2026/06/11/civilian-judges-playing-general-activist-courts-vs-military-readiness/
