Lambda Legal and the Legal Defense Fund issued a letter on Tuesday urging U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to reverse course on a policy that led to the removal of 381 books from the Nimitz Library of the U.S. Naval Academy in Annapolis, Md.

Pursuant to President Donald Trump’s executive order 14190, “Ending Radical Indoctrination in K-12 Schooling,” the institution screened 900 titles to identify works promoting “diversity, equity, and inclusion,” removing those that concerned or touched upon “topics pertaining to the experiences of people of color, especially Black people, and/or LGBTQ people,” according to a press release from the civil rights organizations.

These included “I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings” by Maya Angelou, “Stone Fruit” by Lee Lai, “The Hate U Give” by Angie Thomas, “Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong” by James W. Loewen, “Gender Queer: A Memoir” by Maia Kobabe, and “Democracy in Black: How Race Still Enslaves the American Soul” by Eddie S. Glaude, Jr. 

The groups further noted that “the collection retained other books with messages and themes that privilege certain races and religions over others, including ‘The Clansman: A Historical Romance of the Ku Klux Klan’ by Thomas Dixon, Jr., ‘Mein Kampf’ by Adolf Hitler, and ‘Heart of Darkness’ by Joseph Conrad.

In their letter, Lambda Legal and LDF argued the books must be returned to circulation to preserve the “constitutional rights” of cadets at the institution, warning of the “danger” that comes with “censoring materials based on viewpoints disfavored by the current administration.”

“Such censorship is especially dangerous in an educational setting, where critical inquiry, intellectual diversity, and exposure to a wide array of perspectives are necessary to educate future citizen-leaders,” Lambda Legal Chief Legal Officer Jennifer C. Pizer and LDF Director of Strategic Initiatives Jin Hee Lee said in the press release.

The U.S. Air Force has issued a “directive to cease the use of ‘preferred pronouns’ (he/him, she/her, or they/them) to identify one’s gender identity in professional communications,” according to a report published in the Hill on Wednesday.

The rule, which applies to both airmen and civilian employees, was first adopted on Feb. 4 pursuant to President Donald Trump’s anti-transgender executive order called, “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government.”

Days after the administration’s issuance of that order on the first day of the president’s second term, the Office of Personnel Management instructed agencies across the whole of the federal government to remove pronouns from email signatures and enforce the policy barring employees from using them.

Additionally, on Jan. 27 Trump published an order barring trans people from joining the U.S. Armed Forces, indicating that those who are currently in serving would be separated from the military. The Pentagon is fending off legal challenges to the ban in federal courts.

Particularly given the extent of the new administration’s efforts to restrict the rights of trans Americans and push them out of public life, the Air Force’s reversal of the pronoun guidance was surprising.

According to reporting in Military.com, the move might have come because officials concluded the rule was in conflict with language in the military appropriations funding legislation passed by Congress in 2023.

The NDAA established that the defense secretary “may not require or prohibit a member of the armed forces or a civilian employee of the Department of Defense to identify the gender or personal pronouns of such member or employee in any official correspondence of the Department.”

The Pentagon on Thursday said that within 30 days it will draft and submit a procedure to identify service members who are transgender and begin discharging them from the military within 30 days of that date.

In his second administration, President Donald Trump has ordered an anti-trans military ban that goes further than the policy introduced during his first term, which only prohibited the military from accepting trans enlistees.

LGBTQ groups and other parties that filed lawsuits managed to significantly delay enforcement of the order for years, and likewise they are challenging the 2025 iteration in multiple federal courts.

On Thursday, New York State Attorney General Letitia James and a coalition of 20 attorneys general filed a brief to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington supporting the plaintiffs in one of those cases.

The White House directed the Pentagon to submit a formal policy detailing how the ban would be enforced via Trump’s Jan. 27 executive order, “Prioritizing Military Readiness and Excellence,”—which, like Thursday’s memo, denigrated trans soldiers and dismissed the sacrifice of their service.

Also per Trump’s directive, earlier this month the military announced it would discontinue providing gender affirming medical care and stop welcoming would-be enlistees who are trans.

Critics argue the administration’s policy doesn’t just fail to strengthen the military or fortify America’s defenses, as promised in the title of Trump’s directive, but it actually imperils those very objectives by separating qualified, proven soldiers at the expense of readiness and preparedness without a reasonable justification for their exclusion.

The Pentagon specified the exemptions would be reserved for only cases “provided there is a compelling government interest in retaining the service member that directly supports warfighting capabilities,” and even then only for service members who demonstrate “36 consecutive months of stability in [their] sex without clinically significant distress.”

Estimates of the number of trans service members range from the low thousands to as many as 15,000.

“The scope and severity of this ban is unprecedented. It is a complete purge of all transgender individuals from military service,” Shannon Minter of the National Center For Lesbian Rights told Reuters.

Other LGBTQ organizations shared statements condemning the memo on Thursday.

SPARTA:

Transgender Americans have served openly and honorably in the U.S. Armed Forces for nearly a decade. Thousands of transgender troops are currently serving, and are fully qualified for the positions in which they serve.

No policy will ever erase transgender Americans’ contribution to history, warfighting, or military excellence. Transgender service members have a unique fighting spirit and will continue to defend the constitution and American Values no matter what lies ahead.

In the meantime, SPARTA Pride continues to stand in solidarity with all transgender service members.

The Human Rights Campaign and Lambda Legal, in a joint statement:

The Human Rights Campaign Foundation and Lambda Legal today condemned the Department of Defense (DoD) guidance implementing the Trump administration’s policy banning transgender individuals from enlisting or continuing to serve in the United States Armed Forces that was issued Feb. 26. The policy institutes a 30-day period to begin separation of any current transgender servicemember currently in the military and has immediate impacts on access to healthcare and treatment of transgender servicemembers.

“A dishonorable action from a dishonorable administration. This attack on those who have dedicated themselves to serving our country is not only morally reprehensible but fundamentally un-American. Forcing out thousands of transgender servicemembers—who have met every qualification to serve—does not enhance military excellence or make our country safer. Instead, the United States will be losing highly trained professionals who serve in roles critical to our national security.  The courage and sacrifice demonstrated by transgender servicemembers in uniform-deserve our utmost respect and protection, not discrimination. This blatant injustice cannot stand, and we look forward to continuing to represent the brave transgender servicemembers in court.” 

Earlier this month, Lambda Legal and HRCF filed a federal lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the Trump administration’s ban on military service by transgender people. The lawsuit—brought in response to the administration’s Jan. 27 executive order—was filed on behalf of six actively serving transgender service members, a transgender person seeking to enlist in the military, and Gender Justice League, a civil and human rights organization headquartered in Seattle.

On Feb. 19, Lambda Legal and HRCF asked the district court to block the trans military ban while the litigation proceeds.

Read more about the case here: https://lambdalegal.org/case/shilling-v-trump/

U.S. Rep. Mark Takano (D-Calif.), chair of the Congressional Equality Caucus:

The contrast between Donald Trump—who cried “bone spurs” to avoid military service—and the countless transgender Americans who serve their country with valor couldn’t be any clearer. Now, Trump’s Department of Defense has taken the latest steps to oust thousands of qualified, dedicated, and deployable servicemembers simply because he doesn’t like who they are. This is morally wrong, unconstitutional, and stupid. 

President Trump’s discriminatory ban will needlessly create gaps in critical chains of command, endanger our national security, and flush millions of dollars spent on training these servicemembers down the drain. Every American who is willing and able to serve should be able to, regardless of how the President feels about their identity. As chair of the Equality Caucus, the largest coalition of members in the House of Representatives, I am committed to seeing this un-American ban undone and working to pass explicit, long-lasting protections for transgender people who sign up to serve their nation into law.