Pete Hegseth wants trans troops gone. U.S. Navy & USMC review boards keep finding reasons to keep them

The Pentagon wants transgender troops out. Some military officers reviewing their cases have concluded they should stay.

Navy and Marine Corps separation boards have voted to retain transgender service members in nine of 12 cases, The New York Times reported Friday, revealing resistance within the administrative machinery carrying out President Donald Trump’s military ban. Officers reviewing individual service records are reaching conclusions that conflict with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s blanket campaign to remove them.

A favorable vote does not guarantee a future in uniform. But the decisions expose a tension at the center of the policy. The administration says transgender service is incompatible with military readiness; some officers evaluating those troops want to keep them.

Related: Decorated transgender troops endure closed-door hearings with foregone conclusions in Pentagon purge

Marine Staff Sgt. Damien Contreras received one of those votes. According to The Times, his board reviewed his record as a supply and logistics specialist, including three overseas deployments, and recommended retaining him.

“You have war fighters looking at war fighters,” Contreras told the newspaper.

The outcomes differ sharply across the services. The Times reported that Army boards overwhelmingly recommended discharge, while Air Force boards did so in every known case reviewed.

Related: Trans service members have always been part of U.S. history

The Pentagon narrowed the path to staying

The decisions follow the Pentagon’s move to restrict the boards' independence in hearing these cases.

The Associated Press reported last year that an October 2025 memorandum allowed commanders to override board decisions permitting transgender troops to remain. An earlier Air Force directive required boards to recommend separation for service members diagnosed with gender dysphoria.

The Pentagon also required transgender troops appearing before boards to comply with uniform and grooming standards corresponding to their sex assigned at birth. Proceedings could continue without those who refused, and their noncompliance with the humiliation of essentially showing up in drag could be considered against them.

Those rules placed additional obstacles before troops seeking to defend their careers, even when their performance was not in dispute.

Related: Pentagon’s so-called waiver for trans troops is a cruel hoax

In August, Army Capt. Kai Proce’s lawyer presented extensive documentation of his service, awards, and character. Proce had served for 11 years and mentored cadets at West Point. A panel nevertheless voted to remove him based on his gender dysphoria diagnosis and gender-affirming care.

The administration defends the restrictions by citing readiness, deployability, unit cohesion, discipline, and costs. Its lawyers maintain that the policy addresses a medical condition and related treatment rather than transgender identity.

Yet Hegseth has repeatedly described the objective as excluding transgender people, often using anti-trans slurs in speeches and public statements. The Advocate reported this month that Justice Department attorneys asked a federal judge to disregard his social media statements when assessing the policy.

Related: The Trump administration is paying trans troops not to work

A hearing, and an uncertain future

The removal effort also extends to troops identified through their health records. In September, officials were searching medical and personnel data to identify transgender service members.

Meanwhile, troops challenging the ban in court are confronting separation proceedings themselves.

Army Reserve 2nd Lt. Nicolas Talbott, who is suing the Trump administration to serve, told The Advocate this month that he drove nearly two hours to his Ohio unit to receive paperwork initiating his removal. A close friend he worked with handed him the documents.

“I am absolutely invoking my right to a board of inquiry,” Talbott said.

Another plaintiff, Navy Lt. Clara Winchell, appeared before a board in September. It found her disqualified under the policy but recognized that her record otherwise warranted retention. The board recommended postponing her separation pending the litigation.

An appeals court ruled in June in favor of protections for currently serving plaintiffs. But the mandate implementing that ruling remained unissued while the administration pursued Supreme Court review.

Trial is scheduled for January 4.