A federal judge overseeing a case involving the military’s dismissal of transgender service members sharply criticized the Department of Defense (DoD) over its healthcare spending priorities, revealing that the Pentagon allocates eight times more funding for erectile dysfunction medication than for gender-affirming medical care.
During a hearing in the Talbott v. Trump case, U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes highlighted that the DoD spends about $5.2 million annually on healthcare for service members diagnosed with gender dysphoria. In contrast, the department spends approximately $42 million each year on medications to treat erectile dysfunction.
“It’s not even a rounding error, right?” Judge Reyes asked during the session.
Responding to the judge’s comments, DoD attorney Jason Manion emphasized that the cost per individual still matters. Manion has not responded to additional requests for comment.
The courtroom exchange is part of a broader legal challenge to a Trump administration policy that seeks to remove transgender individuals from military service. The policy could impact nearly 2,000 service members. Plaintiffs argue that transgender troops have met all military readiness standards and that their removal wastes taxpayer investments already made in their training and service.
Read Also: Trump Melts Down Over ‘Gifted’ $400M Jet From Qatar: ‘World Class Losers!’
Military analysts have warned that such a policy could worsen existing recruitment and retention issues. One scholar told Newsweek that without a diverse pool of applicants, the military will struggle to meet its personnel goals or attract top-tier talent.
Judge Reyes expressed frustration during the hearing over the DoD’s reliance on articles and studies that its legal team admitted they had not fully read. She accused them of selectively quoting from studies and misrepresenting data to support the department’s position that transgender individuals undermine military effectiveness.
Jennifer Levi, senior director of Transgender and Queer Rights at GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders (GLAD Law), and one of the attorneys representing the service members, criticized the administration’s approach. “DoD’s submission of articles and analysis that they haven’t read is consistent with the shameful way this administration has been carrying out this purge,” Levi told Newsweek. “The only evidence submitted by the government shows how valuable these troops are.”
Judge Reyes also referenced comments made by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, who previously claimed transgender service members lacked core military values. She pressed DoD lawyers to clarify whether such statements were appropriate, asking if they considered labeling individuals as liars and lacking integrity to be insulting. The attorney responded, “Maybe,” and insisted that the precise language was not used in the executive order or policy directive.
The executive order states that identifying with a gender different from one’s biological sex conflicts with military standards of discipline, truthfulness, and humility. Reyes challenged the rationale, suggesting that higher rates of suicidal ideation among transgender people are likely caused by societal discrimination, not inherent mental health conditions.
Despite transgender service members representing less than one percent of the military, the administration has invested significant resources in legal efforts to uphold the ban. Plaintiffs argue the dismissals occurred without due process and constitute a violation of their Fifth Amendment rights.
The lawsuit was brought by several active-duty personnel, including Nicolas Talbott, Erica Vandal, Kate Cole, Gordon Herrero, Dany Danridge, Jamie Hash, Koda Nature, and Cael Neary. Among them are decorated members such as Major Vandal, who received a Bronze Star, and ENS Danridge, who earned a Sailor of the Year award.
The defendants named in the lawsuit include former President Donald J. Trump in his official capacity, along with senior defense and military officials and various branches of the armed forces.
Read Also: “We Voted Trump to Win Miami”: Venezuelan Voters Regret Their Support as “Now He’s Kicking Us Out”
The Department of Defense declined to comment, citing its policy of not addressing ongoing litigation.
The plaintiffs are seeking a court ruling declaring the executive order unconstitutional and an injunction to block the categorical exclusion of transgender individuals from military service. Judge Reyes indicated that a ruling could be expected as early as next week, though she acknowledged that the case is likely to face appeals regardless of the outcome.
“This will not be the last stop in this train’s journey,” Reyes said.
