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

The Trump administration’s campaign to drive transgender people from the military is being carried out inside closed hearing rooms, where decorated service members are subjected to proceedings ordinarily used to remove troops accused of drug abuse, domestic violence or theft.

There are no cameras or public transcripts. Spouses can be excluded. Some transgender troops have been barred from attending the proceedings that will determine whether they lose their careers.

A remarkable New York Times report published Monday provides a rare look inside the separation boards the Pentagon is using to enforce President Donald Trump’s ban on transgender military service. Although the hearings are presented as individualized reviews, the report found that years of exemplary performance often cannot overcome a gender dysphoria diagnosis in a service member’s medical record.

That was the case for Capt. Kai Proce, an Army officer who served for 11 years, deployed to South Korea and the Middle East and mentored 125 cadets at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point.

His final performance review described him as one of the best officers his commander had encountered in nearly three decades. His lawyer presented hundreds of pages documenting his service, awards and character.

The Army’s case was far simpler. Proce had been diagnosed with gender dysphoria and received gender-affirming care. A three-officer panel voted to remove him.

Related: New Pentagon memo dictates how transgender troops must look to defend their service

A diagnosis becomes the verdict

Trump ordered the Pentagon shortly after returning to office last year to exclude transgender people from military service, declaring that being transgender conflicted with the “honorable, truthful and disciplined lifestyle” expected of service members.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth dispensed with the bureaucratic language when he proclaimed, “No more dudes in dresses.”

The policy targets troops who have a current or past diagnosis of gender dysphoria, received transition-related medical care, or exhibit symptoms the military associates with the condition. Thousands accepted financial incentives to leave rather than wait to be involuntarily discharged. Others chose to remain and challenge their removals before separation boards.

The boards resemble trials, the Times reports. Lawyers present evidence, witnesses testify, and three officers decide whether a service member should remain in uniform.

But the central question is often not whether someone can deploy, lead troops or meet military standards. It is whether their medical records contain a diagnosis the military itself once required many transgender troops to obtain before receiving authorized care.

Army Reserve lawyer Priya Rashid, who has represented dozens of transgender troops, told the Times that she had lost 27 of 28 cases. She described the proceedings as a “public humiliation ritual.”

At least six of her clients were reportedly barred from their own hearings after refusing to cut their hair or appear in uniforms corresponding with their sex assigned at birth. One master sergeant with 17 years of service was allowed to testify remotely only with her camera turned off.

Service members accused of serious misconduct are generally permitted to sit in the room while the government argues its case. According to the Times, transgender troops accused of no misconduct are not being afforded the same dignity.

Related: Gen. Stanley McChrystal presides over historic farewell for five transgender troops forced into retirement

Five days from retirement

Maj. Kara Corcoran had led an infantry platoon in combat in Afghanistan. When she appeared before a separation board, she was five days short of completing 18 years of service, an important milestone on the path toward securing retirement and health care benefits for herself and her two daughters, the Times reports.

Her competence was not in dispute. The government successfully moved to exclude half of her character witnesses because her record had already established that she was a good soldier.

The issue was whether she had gender dysphoria. The board voted to remove her, although it recommended that the Army make an exception and preserve her retirement benefits. She was still awaiting a final decision when the Times published its report.

“People need to know that this whole thing is cruelty,” Corcoran told the newspaper. “It was intentionally designed to hurt us.”

Corcoran is also the executive director of SPARTA Pride, a leading organization for transgender service members, veterans and military families. She joined the group in 2018 and served as an Army chapter leader, board member and vice president before becoming its first full-time executive director.

SPARTA has supported troops facing separation, advocated on Capitol Hill and pressed lawmakers to protect military families from restrictions on health care and other benefits.

For more than a year, Corcoran has been kept on administrative leave, separated from the work she trained to perform while the Army determines her future. After a federal judge certified a broader class of transgender troops challenging the ban in June, she told The Advocate that she had been “left in limbo when all I want to do is continue serving my country.”

At SPARTA Pride’s Albert Cashier Awards in March, Corcoran said the administration’s campaign against transgender troops reflected a broader politics of exclusion.

“This whole fight is so much bigger than us,” she told The Advocate, pointing to attacks on transgender people, women and people of color.

She has also rejected the administration’s claim that removing transgender troops improves military readiness. A review of 58 studies found no evidence that transgender service harmed cohesion, deployability or military effectiveness. Research instead found that service members who transitioned often experienced improvements in health and performance.

The contradiction is particularly stark inside Hegseth’s self-styled “High-T Department of War.” In July, he announced annual testosterone deficiency screenings for all service members 30 and older and offered voluntary testosterone replacement therapy to those deemed deficient, presenting hormone treatment as a way to improve health, performance and military readiness. Yet the Pentagon is simultaneously using hormone therapy to justify expelling transgender troops with proven records of fitness and deployment.

U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes has ordered the administration to explain why testosterone is readiness-enhancing care for cisgender service members but evidence of unfitness when prescribed to transgender men.

Related: Meet the transgender Army lieutenant who is challenging Donald Trump's military ban

The appearance of due process

Reyes certified a class of transgender service members and prospective troops challenging the ban in June and scheduled a trial for January. The Justice Department has said it intends to seek U.S. Supreme Court intervention.

Congress also recently rejected an effort to write the ban into federal law. Four Republicans joined Democrats to defeat the amendment, leaving the policy vulnerable to the courts, a future Congress or the next president.

None of that stops the boards meeting now. The military continues to call service members into closed rooms, acknowledge that they have served honorably, and then remove them for obtaining care they were explicitly permitted to receive.